[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#116093: marked as done (DNS names does not resolve on sparc)



Your message dated Sun, 3 Feb 2002 23:33:18 -0800
with message-id <20020204073318.GC30490@oink>
and subject line unreproducible (fixed?), closing (DNS names does not resolve on sparc)
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 18 Oct 2001 12:55:28 +0000
>From ahltorp@nada.kth.se Thu Oct 18 07:55:28 2001
Return-path: <ahltorp@nada.kth.se>
Received: from fridge.nada.kth.se [130.237.222.120] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 15uChr-0001fb-00; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 07:55:27 -0500
Received: (from ahltorp@localhost)
	by fridge.nada.kth.se (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.7) id OAA17350;
	Thu, 18 Oct 2001 14:55:26 +0200 (MET DST)
X-Authentication-Warning: fridge.nada.kth.se: ahltorp set sender to ahltorp@nada.kth.se using -f
Sender: ahltorp@nada.kth.se
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: DNS names does not resolve on sparc
From: Magnus Ahltorp <ahltorp@nada.kth.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Language: en
Date: 18 Oct 2001 14:55:26 +0200
Message-ID: <awt4rox85vl.fsf@fridge.nada.kth.se>
Lines: 19
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) Emacs/20.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Package: boot-floppies
Version: 2.3.6
Severity: Important

When I use DHCP to get my network configuration, DNS names does not
resolve. This seems to be because /etc/resolv.conf points to
/target/etc/resolv.conf, and /target/etc/resolv.conf points to
../tmp/resolv.conf, which is the /tmp of the target disk. However, the
resolv.conf file is not there, it is in the /tmp of the installation
RAM disk.

Pointing /target/etc/resolv.conf to /tmp/resolv.conf or copying the
contents makes programs like ping resolve DNS names. The installation
program does not resolve DNS names after this.

A work-around is to use IP addresses instead.

Boot: TFTP
Hardware: Sparc Station 4

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 116093-done) by bugs.debian.org; 4 Feb 2002 07:39:51 +0000
>From dwhedon@dualmedia.fr Mon Feb 04 01:39:51 2002
Return-path: <dwhedon@dualmedia.fr>
Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 16XdjD-00035G-00; Mon, 04 Feb 2002 01:39:51 -0600
Received: from oink ([12.233.47.38]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP
          id <20020204073920.ICQI10199.rwcrmhc53.attbi.com@oink>
          for <116093-done@bugs.debian.org>; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 07:39:20 +0000
Received: from dwhedon by oink with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 16Xdcs-0007y3-00
	for <116093-done@bugs.debian.org>; Sun, 03 Feb 2002 23:33:18 -0800
Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2002 23:33:18 -0800
From: David Kimdon <dwhedon@debian.org>
To: 116093-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: unreproducible (fixed?), closing (DNS names does not resolve on sparc)
Message-ID: <20020204073318.GC30490@oink>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i
Sender: David Kimdon <dwhedon@dualmedia.fr>
Delivered-To: 116093-done@bugs.debian.org

Looking through the code doesn't bring up anything that could be
causing this problem.  I haven't observed this problem myself and have
done many installs using dhcp (admittedly not on sparc, not tftp).  I
expect it is fixed, but I don't see in the logs where it was fixed.
The submitter doesn't have hardware to test on any longer.  I'm
closing the bug.

-David



Reply to: