Re: Linuxconfig opinions
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> > I have encountered a program called 'linuxconfig'
>
> Surely ou mean "linuxconf"?
> My advice: dump it.
> I've used Unix systems since 1987, GNU/Linux since 1997, and Debian for
> just over a year.
My first experience with anything *nix was in April of this year. Mandrake 7.0
on a standard intel box. Linuxconf works well with Mandrake. I installed
Potato on a new laptop, rebuilt the kernel for VESA framebuffer and all. A
couple of days ago, I installed bind and set the laptop up as a subdomain of my
main domain, the Mandrake box. I use several VirtualHost aliases with Apache
(jake.my.dom, www.my.dom, project1.my.dom, project2.my.dom, etc.) (No, I do not
use linuxconf for zone file creation, Debian or Mandrake). I changed
/etc/resolv.conf on the laptop to first use itself as its main nameserver. For
this I did use linuxconf. Then verified /etc/resolv.conf and was happy with the
result. URLs like www.lap.my.dom were pinging fine, and Netscape displayed the
page I was wanting to see, even when not on the network. Then I rebooted the
laptop. Apache stalled because it couldn't resolve www.lap.my.dom. Something
had reset my resolv.conf to use my box as it's nameserver. So I reran
linuxconf, verified /etc/resolv.conf, chmod 444 /etc/resolv.conf, reboot. Same
thing... Cannot resolve www.lap.my.dom, as well as root write permission on
resolv.conf. So now in /etc/rc2.d I have S27fixresolv (a short perl script to
rewrite /etc/resolv.conf) S30bind and S32apache which works, but is sloppy.
What am I getting at?
1) Why would Debian include anything that would rewrite a vital system
configuration file that has no write permission?
2) Why would Debian include a "System Configuration Tool", only to rewrite the
files it produces?
#/etc/init.d grep resolv.conf * only matches my fixresolv script
#/sbin grep resolv.conf * only matches binary files
#/usr/sbin grep resolv.conf * aha! pcnetconfig
OK, So now I can restore rc2.d, but my questions remain.
Jake
Reply to: