luci-mod-system: use DirectInterface for bound dropbear interface #7484
Conversation
Since openwrt/openwrt@3f96246 the correct UCI option for specifying the bound interface is DirectInterface instead of Interface. Signed-off-by: Daniel Nilsson <dannil+github@protonmail.com>
|
As reported on the formu which I also noticed is that if you upgrade from 23.05.5 to 24.10.0-rc2 the UI will show the interface as "unspecified", as the option isn't specified. Do we have a way to handle that or do we even need to? It's purely a cosmetic issue as the init script still checks for |
|
It looks like we're forced to choose. I've used Interface for years and never had a single problem. I have several IPs on a single interface and each work fine. |
As long as |
|
One thing I haven't yet understood - since the code comments in the init script are contradictory - what Direct is supposed to fix? I have only ever specified interfaces for Interface, and never had a problem. So the error message is misleading: Based on the forum report - of course it will show unknown. Since the luci app is looking for 'Interface' which is not set, but only DirectInterface is set. Perhaps we should address this via .write and .load functions, which save to DirectInterface and/or Interface, and check and load from them in that order. |
Ah, so they changed the behaviour of the existing option? |
That is at least my understanding, yes. You can see that they added a warning for specifying interfaces as an option for |
|
The code comments do not give me much confidence: # 'DirectInterface' should specify single interface
# but end users may misinterpret this setting
DirectInterface=$(normalize_list "${DirectInterface}")
# 'Interface' should specify single interface
# but end users are often misinterpret this setting
Interface=$(normalize_list "${Interface}") |
|
What we have today in luci works, so we can provide a parallel option. But only when it's clear what should do what. The original issue seems to discuss the problem when someone does the following, which is what the init script perhaps choked on |
|
Luci paradigm is currently correct. It allows one to create multiple instances, each instance with exactly one Interface. See @stangri comment here openwrt/packages#25555 |
Since openwrt/openwrt@3f96246 the correct UCI option for specifying the bound interface is DirectInterface instead of Interface.
See https://forum.openwrt.org/t/openwrt-24-10-0-rc2-second-release-candidate/217483/154?u=dannil
Signed-off-by: <my@email.address>row (viagit commit --signoff)<package name>: titlefirst line subject for packagesPKG_VERSIONin the Makefile N/A