Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 19:54:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Sean Eric Fagan <sef@Kithrup.COM> To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Microsoft brainrot (was: r-cmds and DNS and /etc/host.conf) Message-ID: <199709280254.TAA20632@kithrup.com> In-Reply-To: <19970928101941.03210.kithrup.freebsd.chat@lemis.com> References: <199709272127.OAA11524@usr08.primenet.com>; from Terry Lambert on Sat, Sep 27, 1997 at 09:27:02PM %2B0000
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>> Writing a Motif-based program would take a tremenduous amount of time.
But writing a Tk-based program to do it takes less. I've got someone who
wants to do it -- he is simply lacking in time. A bit of prodding, and he
may be willing to make time to do it. ("it" in this case is a GUI interface
to the real-time named editing that Paul has put into BIND 8.something -- so
you don't edit the host files any longer, you can have named edit them for
you. There are some obvious security implications, of course.)
>> If you make it grammar-based, you write it once, and it works for a
>> crudload of command line configurators that know how to be run over
>> pipes. Like disk partition tools, install tools, etc..
>Correct. But why?
I dunno 'bout you, but I hate having to partition drives using 'disklabel
-e'. Fortunately, I don't add new drives all that often, and it can be done
now using /stand/sysinstall.
Of course, what Terry is talking about is having a common utility to do the
disk partitioning, install menus, etc., and have a "script" for each
particular need. There are numerous examples of existing utilities to do
this, in commercial OSes.
>How do you find out your configuration with this horrible,
>complicated, you-only-see-as-much-at-a-time-as-I-want-to-show-
>you-and-make-sure-you-keep-alternating-from-keyboard-to-mouse Motif
>application once you have entered your initial configuration?
"The experienced user will know what to do."
Most people don't need all that information; most people just need to set up
a fairly standard configuration. That's what the "friendly" tools are for.
And the files are still editable for the people who know what they are
doing, and what they want.
Having a simple "create a standardized named.boot, <domain>.zone, and
<network>.rev file" shell script, which would ask a couple of questions,
would suffice in Terry's case. Of course, he could write that shell script
pretty easily, and submit it. Except, of course, that people have this
tendency to just reject anything Terry says *because* it's from Terry :).
>Wrong on both counts. 99.99% of the computer users in the world don't
>understand the question -- which is why they are MS users instead of
>UNIX. In fact, I'm very surprised to find you defending this
>position.
And if 99.99% of the computer users can't understand the question, what
makes you think they'll want to fiddle with the bits that the GUI program
doesn't allow them to?
>> Normal mortals don't like TCP/IP because it bears no resemblance to
>> reality. I don't have to name my car to remember where I parked it.
>What's your license plate, Terry?
I don't know my license plate.
I know what my car looks like, and I remember vaguely where I parked it.
This caused me a problem, once, when there was someone parked an identical
car next to mine (same year, colour, model, and transmission type -- only
difference was that this imposter car had some rosary beads hanging from the
rear-view mirror, which I noticed just as I put the key in the lock).
What that has to do with anything, I don't know -- you're refusing to see
Terry's point, possibly because it's Terry, and Terry is going on about a
grand unified field theory when he could have solved the special relativity
problem and gotten his nobel prize by now. :)
>>> but the vendor of that cr*p didn't get the underlying nameserver
>>> working correctly at all. (For example, the server never hands out
>>> authoritative answers, even if it is for sure an authoritative server.)
>> This may be intentional laxity. In their opinion, you are supposed
>> to buy an NT server and configure WINS naming instead of DNS.
>Make up your mind what you're arguing.
Lessee... it was said that "the vendor of that cr*p* didn't get th
eunderlying nameserver working correctly at all." Terry responds that uSoft
may have done that intentionally, since they'd rather you run WINS instead
of DNS.
In other words, he was making a specific reply to a specific comment of
yours.
>Then why don't you do it and import the configuration to your UNIX
>box? I'd like to see it, if only to pick holes in it. How do you set
>up a HINFO RR? An ISDN RR?
Most people don't need to set up an ISDN RR. I don't even know what that
is. I certainly don't have one.
Few people seem to bother setting up an HINFO RR these days. I don't, I
think. But it's certainly easy enough to set up.
Of coruse, since Paul wants to have BIND handle arbitrary resource records,
it's unlikely that any front-end interface is going to be able to handle all
cases.
That doesn't invalidate Terry's point.
Replies sent to me and the list will be returned to the sender -- learn to
edit your headers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199709280254.TAA20632>