reopen 443871 thanks El Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 08:54:38PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit va escriure: > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 06:08:35PM +0000, Sergio Talens-Oliag wrote: > > I want to use resolconf with pdnsd and be able to bind to an interface > > different than the loopback one, but the current scripts hardcode the > > 127.0.0.1 address. > > > > Attached you will find a patch that tries to read the server_ip value from > > the > > pdnsd.conf file and uses it when available; if it can't find the value falls > > back to use the loopback address. > > This is way too brittle, for me to accept this patch (as there could > be multiple server_ip lines, quoted ones, whatever). What you need to > plug pdnsd into resolvconf is located under /etc, hence won't be > modified through upgrades (conffiles). You can do whatever you want with > those.
I accept that my patch is not good enough for your taste, and maybe a better one or a different solution is a better option, but I disagree about your argument about conffiles. Instead of simplifying the maintenance of the package you want me to modify two configuration files (if I do a manual configuration that is normal) but I also need to change and review on each upgrade two scripts that I would normally asume that I don't need to touch (in Debian the use of /etc/default/PACKAGE_NAME usually means that I don't need to touch the scripts distributed under /etc). > I provide two reasonable usual setups, if yours differs, use "manual" > setup, and do your config. I offer _rock solid_ configuration schemes, > sorry, but your patch isn't. My patch is not _rock solid_, but I'm using a "manual" setup and when I do a really simple change on the main configuration file the system breaks and I need to change two additional scripts because you have hardcoded a value... I would not call that _rock solid_, would you? Now the question is, would you accept a patch to support the use of a variable in /etc/default/pdnsd to change the resolvconf server ip for manual setups? I've attached such a patch to this message, it is trivial and does not break your current system, I would appreciate if you accept it or provide an alternative that removes the need to change the scripts and review them on each upgrade. Thanks in advance, Sergio. -- Sergio Talens-Oliag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://people.debian.org/~sto/> Key fingerprint = 29DF 544F 1BD9 548C 8F15 86EF 6770 052B B8C1 FA69
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
