Re: [Cooker] Progress 20000506
Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A. Nameserver line from the dbox not parsed. Set to /etc/resolv.conf as is, which is stupid: 1. The first line in /etc/resolv.conf should be "search domain". This domain is not collected by the dbox. the box domain name is used. it seems fairly common use. 2. Multiple nameservers should be parsed out and set to /etc/resolv.conf one per line with a"nameserver " prefix. you mean why doesn't it ask for more than one nameserver? seems a good thing to add. 2 nameservers is ok? B. /etc/hosts is not set up. This means that only IP numbers, not names, may be used in the remote lp dbox. 1. The host names and their IPs for /etc/hosts should be collected by a new dbox and set to /etc/hosts This must be done before remote lp setup and testing. do you think that's really needed at install? nowadays, most people have DNS, don't they? C. Default route is not set up. For gateway machines a new dbox should collect the interface for the default route and set it up. For LAN machines the gateway address should be set as the default route. ?? gateway @ is asked
Re: [Cooker] Progress 20000506
Pixel wrote: Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 2. Multiple nameservers should be parsed out and set to /etc/resolv.conf one per line with a"nameserver " prefix. you mean why doesn't it ask for more than one nameserver? seems a good thing to add. 2 nameservers is ok? Two is usual, but I have seen space to enter four nameservers. B. /etc/hosts is not set up. This means that only IP numbers, not names, may be used in the remote lp dbox. 1. The host names and their IPs for /etc/hosts should be collected by a new dbox and set to /etc/hosts This must be done before remote lp setup and testing. do you think that's really needed at install? nowadays, most people have DNS, don't they? Small networks don't need DNS, they use /etc/hosts, set the same on all machines, just like /etc/resolv.conf must be set the same on all machines. It needs to be set up during install so that your remote printer test works using machine names, and so that ping, name lookup, etc work immediately on the first run of the new Linux. C. Default route is not set up. For gateway machines a new dbox should collect the interface for the default route and set it up. For LAN machines the gateway address should be set as the default route. ?? gateway @ is asked route default gw name That's good for machines on a LAN, but NOT for the gateway (say has eth0 on the internet and eth1 on the LAN) machine or for no-LAN machines. Any machine with 2 NICs (any more are ignored, by both Windows and Linux - very strange) should cause the installer to ask which are to be ifconfig up. If both are required up, then this machine is a gateway, and needs the following: route default eth0 A no-LAN machine with a NIC also requires this, not a gateway address. -- Regards, Ron. [AU] - sent by Linux.
Re: [Cooker] Progress 20000506
On 6 May 2000, Pixel wrote: Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 2. Multiple nameservers should be parsed out and set to /etc/resolv.conf one per line with a"nameserver " prefix. you mean why doesn't it ask for more than one nameserver? seems a good thing to add. 2 nameservers is ok? yes, 2 would be good. also, it would be nice to be able to specify a couple search domains and have them setup Eric.
Re: [Cooker] Progress 20000506
Ron Stodden wrote: Previously reported problems no corrected: X Window setup Remote Printer Setup Test Networking (partial - see below) New Problems: A. Nameserver line from the dbox not parsed. Set to /etc/resolv.conf as is, which is stupid: [...] Hi Ron, and every one who give their own opinions . - ( Sorry for my bad english ) I considerate myself as just a bit more than a Linux newbie. What I see by your message is that you must be a strong Linux user. Is ()@optushome.com.au means that youre from Autralia ? Let say yes... And me, I'm from Quebec, Canada. That means everybody from all around the world can try betas and write their own question and bug reports and problems here during the beta process of Mandrake distribs with their own skill. What I saw also in your message is that you know, as an expert, what is wrong in the install set you tested. Cool! I know, you know and almost everybody know that while in progress, a project will have some "stupid" behaviours... Thus, I just can't retain myself to point you with the way you reported the problem above ( and all other people previously) . I'm sure every Mandrake staff who work on the next 7.1 release are excited and do their job with LOVE. Telling them that something is "stupid" could harm their "amour propre" and its not the way of the debugging process's communications - anyway... Let say you're the only one who says something mad... "Bah! its not worth to be sad at it..." But I read all the messages here for a while since two weeks and its not the first time I see mad words... Hey guys they, @Mandrake try to make Linux as best as never saw with all computer configurations imaginable. This is a lot of work! We are here to help them. NOT to tell them that something somebody did or forgot is "stupid"... Sincerement, Serge Lussier ICQ#53409121
Re: [Cooker] Progress 20000506
Serge, Hear! Hear! My use of "stupid" is not personal, but an objective statement. When an implementation does not fulfil its goal, it will have to be redone, so is at least partially a waste of developmental resources. It is stupid of a company to waste its resources. -- Regards, Ron. [AU] - sent by Linux. [Australian, yes, but lived in Ottawa 1979 to 1990]
