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

Bug#174360: some comments on your solutions



Hi Zefram, hope you're still with us on this thread after some
inactivity.

>     1. What is the hostname of this host?  You may give an unqualified
>        or fully-qualified name.  [Default name is unqualified.
>        Check for RFC1123 compliance, allowing but not requiring full
>        qualification.  This is what goes in /etc/hostname.]

See, this is the kind of thing that alienates newbies. Something they
don't understand is "fully-qualified or unqualified" and explaining it
is an exercise in futility. However, what they _do_ understand is,
"hey, name your machine, it's cool!" But I do agree that the domain name
should undergo some RFC1123 verification behind the scenes, and if an
error occurs, then we'll say "well, sorry, but domain names mustn't
contain these characters, etc..."

But why not just silently figure out whether to ask the domain question
or not?

if (not_qualified)
{
  debconf_input(client, "high", "netcfg/get_domain")
  [...]
}
else
{
  [continue on with life]
}

>     2. [If hostname given was unqualified.]  What is the domain name
>        that should be attached to the hostname to make the host's FQDN?
>        [Default blank, which should be permitted.  If non-blank, this
>        domain name is used to create an FQDN alias in /etc/hosts.]

Yeah, so this is already done for all names, but with a slightly friendlier
text.

>     3. What domains should be searched to look up unqualified hostnames?
>        [Default is the domain part of the host's FQDN, or "." if that
>        is blank.  Permit multiple domain names.  A blank list is treated
>        as ".".  The list goes into /etc/resolv.conf.]

This should be ignored if DHCP was successful. And even if we only used
static configuration, we should just extract the top level domain part
of the FQDN. I.E.

hostname is darjeeling.triplehelix.org (fully qualified)
so 'search triplehelix.org'.

Hoping to hear your countercomment on my comment to your solutions :)

-- 
Joshua Kwan

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: