On Tuesday 11 August 2009 13:22:28 Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > The DNS self test executed at the end of the installation fail with > the new DNS in LDAP configuration. The reason is that two entries are > no longer present in DNS: > > dhcp001.intern / 10.0.2.101 > ltsp010.intern / 192.168.0.10 Please note there's an open bug report (#1352) to this issue: http://bugs.skolelinux.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1352
> Should these be present, or should the test code be changed? No > dhcp###.intern entries are in DNS at the moment, and only > ltsp200.intern-ltsp253.intern are present for the ltsp### entires. In > addition, ltspserver00, printer00 and static00 are present in > DNS. Should the latter be removed? I would guess that either we > expect all new hosts/boxes to be registered in DNS when they are added > to the network (and thus should drop ltspserver00, printer00, static00 > and ltsp###), or they should not and we should reinsert the DNS > entries we used to include in Etch. Some discusion of this was on the list: http://lists.debian.org/debian-edu/2009/05/msg00067.html It concluded with: http://lists.debian.org/debian-edu/2009/05/msg00243.html I believe the reasoning was: Supply an example entry for each (ltspserver|printer|static)00 and the range of unregistered ltsp(200-253) clients. > I guess which one we pick depend on how easy it is to add new entries > to DNS. Preferably it should be one click based on the information > collected using sitesummary. Or we could expect admins to add the > required information to LDAP using lwat. Suppose LWAT handels DNS entries for manually configured hosts while there is no implementation for sitesummary-based-auto-mass-add-host-on-double-click (hypothetically speaking :-) what would be your view? Think, I would have remove these tests if nothing happens until the release is ready. Odd. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
