Re: openresolv vs. resolvconf

2010-12-01 Thread Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe
Thomas Hood  wrote:
> I am interested in how openresolv stacks up against resolvconf.
...
> What further pros and cons do people see out there?

Mh, having a quick glimpse at openresolv I doubt it is the drop-in
replacement for resolvconf that it suggests to be (Provides/Conflicts:
resolvconf). At least the current package doesn't seem to execute the
hooks in /etc/resolvconf/update{,-libc}.d


regards
   Mario
-- 
Wine is fine, but wiskey is quicker. Suicide is slow with liquor.
 -- Ozzy Osbourne


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/slrnifceo4.9qh.mario.ho...@darkside.dyn.samba-tng.org



Re: openresolv vs. resolvconf

2010-11-30 Thread Brian May
On 30 November 2010 22:57, Thomas Hood  wrote:
> An important advantage of openresolv could be that it isn't, like resolvconf, 
> undermaintained[1].  If openresolv is truly a drop-in replacement for 
> resolvconf then migration from resolvconf to openresolv would be one way of 
> solving this undermaintenance problem.

Do we really need two solutions for what appears to be the same
problem? Seems like it might be better to merge them or remove one.
Especially if one is under-maintained. This is one case I don't see
any advantage having two independent implementations.
-- 
Brian May 


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/aanlktin-y1ungnjn4hycoe-uvzdsf7ey8cu5mydrb...@mail.gmail.com



openresolv vs. resolvconf

2010-11-30 Thread Thomas Hood
I am interested in how openresolv stacks up against resolvconf.

For starters the openresolv home page conveniently compares[0] openresolv with 
resolvconf.

> * Works with POSIX shell and userland

Nice.  Resolvconf requires bash.  But since resolvconf scripts are short, and 
bash is Essential in Debian, this doesn't seem like a major advantage.


> * Does not need awk, grep or sed which means we can work without /usr mounted

Resolvconf does not use awk.  It does use grep and sed but these aren't under 
/usr.  This is no accident: resolvconf was also designed to work without /usr 
mounted.


> * Works with other init systems than Debians' out of the box
> * Available as a 2 clause BSD license

Compatibility with non-Debian systems is an advantage if it has the result that 
most distros can standardize on one package.  Resolvconf has been ported to 
other distros and a quick Google search reveals that openresolv is available 
for several distros, but I don't know
what the adoption statuses of the packages are.

Resolvconf is GPL.


> * Prefer configs via IF_METRIC for dynamic ordering

Sounds like a good idea.  If two addresses are available, put the one available 
via a route with the lowest metric first in the nameserver list.  Resolvconf 
doesn't do this at present.


> * Configures zones for local resolvers other than libc

Resolvconf and openresolv are primarily middleware that mediate between 
interface configurers and name servers and resolvers.  Both can and do support 
alternative resolvers to the glibc resolver, via hook scripts.  Any hook 
scripts for one can presumably be ported quite
easily to the other and vice versa.


An important advantage of openresolv could be that it isn't, like resolvconf, 
undermaintained[1].  If openresolv is truly a drop-in replacement for 
resolvconf then migration from resolvconf to openresolv would be one way of 
solving this undermaintenance problem.


What further pros and cons do people see out there?


[0]http://roy.marples.name/projects/openresolv/wiki/OpenResolvReasons
[1]http://bugs.debian.org/477723
-- 
Thomas Hood


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cf4e6bf.7030...@gmail.com