Re: [PATCH] fix dhcp template generation
Vreman, Peter - Acision wrote:
The dhcp template generation is broken when there is no dns-name for
interfaces set. The attached patch fixes this problem and does some
cleanup to the code. Also the entries are now named with the system
record name and interface instead of generic<idx>. This makes
debugging the template easier.
Peter
This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended
recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential
information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be
copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are
not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and
any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cobbler-devel mailing list
cobbler-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler-devel
Not applying... I'll explain.
I am generally not interested in "refactoring" in general -- the
practice of shuffling code around has a high likelihood of introducing
more bugs, and we do not generally have a large amount of folks that
help with pre-release testing. Also, such patches are notoriously
hard to review. We prefer that bugfixes are more surgical. So, if
you're fixing a bug
always strive to fix it in the least amount of lines possible. Be a ninja.
Cleanup -- where we decide it's needed -- needs to go on devel, while
fixes need to go to master & devel.
Further, the generic naming only applied when the hostnames were not
set. I believe it used the names when they were there ... so, was
that wrong? When you say something "is broken", it's best to explain
why it's broken. It might be very well horribly broken, but I'd need to
know ... broken how? How do I show what is broken? What happens to
the file, etc? Broken can mean lots of things ... tracebacks,
unwanted behavior, error messages, etc. Being specific about what is
broken makes it easier to understand what the actual problem is. I
can't intuit that from the patch seeing it's mixed in with the code
reorganization.
Sorry for longwinded comments, though I can't apply this to 1.6.4
because it is a bit intrusive for a release coming out in a few days; so
I really need to know what the root problem is instead.
--Michael