udhcp and busybox

[Rob Landley]

On Monday 27 March 2006 10:19 am, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 10:55:38AM +0200, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > Rich Felker wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 04:22:12PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > >>> So you have two options - either
> > >>> delete the current gateway first or don't add another gateway.  I
> > >>> agree, using the udhcp nameservers is not as important.
> > >>
> > >> No, if it supplies one I'll happily modify /etc/resolv.conf.  I can
> > >> see a command line option telling it not to do that, though.
> > >
> > > I'm just a user, but I'm strongly against dhcp clients overwriting
> > > system config files by default. Just because all the broken mainstream
> > > ones do it doesn't mean its a good idea.
> >
> > I'm just curious, because I'm always been irritated about dhcp clients
> > modifying the /etc/resolv.conf file. Do you have any better suggestions
> > how a dhcp client should set the nameservers without modifying
> > /etc/resolv.conf?
>
> Yes. I keep a fixed known-good nameserver in resolv.conf and use that
> regardless of what network I'm on. On many systems this is 127.0.0.1
> and I don't want dhcpcd changing it to some slow remote server...

I think the busyboxish way to deal with this is to have 
updating /etc/resolv.conf be a compile time configuration option.  If you 
don't like it, configure it out. :)

I'll put that in my revamp, but I've got Real Life queued up for a couple days 
first...

> Rich

Rob
-- 
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.