1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.DEVEL

  • FQDN mandatory or can a machine could not have a domain ?

    From Bastien =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roucari=E8s?@21:1/5 to All on Fri Nov 8 21:18:31 2024
    Copy: [email protected]
    Copy: [email protected]

    Hi,

    I am trying to improve a few CI of your package and I found some package (for instance mail associated package) could not be tested if the machine is not a FQDN

    Does it seems a reasonable assumption to use a domain for an host even if it is localdomain or test ?

    Do you think it is a good idea to set the testbed hostname to a FQDN ?

    Bastien
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEXQGHuUCiRbrXsPVqADoaLapBCF8FAmcugCgACgkQADoaLapB CF+GsA//SadP1jKalCMxT6HVd0QJOszESuHEFKGbeUYA3pCWESi6kHpmZyc1dymR 5pVxdxd7Wpo+lh6DwootZvWtdWKZtPhvFH1RsJlG5/CtOPMi5FXXLfh4R8PWoCfp IfZmzBgPo6kR1iQlXDpwJrbjlL06I39Kw9B1fsgQpcPXCtrF0M5TNGHGz3a6irJd /iun/U/7JWqFnA4Ivrz1ruNmb82jxsXJNx3OftQzk3RDQk2cLIqKd6/e+RQ8eae3 YzYEvYc4CjAs5eF9blohJJYUUw5l9mj+wz9OzLr4s0ZkcKU19mbT7A4K/xlBIc0o 2RMee5BMoLWm4+JuhN5rlXOZuO6bvJuQNQbBH9kwlJV+CMCZkYZUsdEm8DPZgSIU XbSV/uK315kmspYPvI0QMMBluFPpMRZxzr8hAWTR2QdbYU2+UQrdJuJGjPxh4+/Y A8bPLCif6H2EDGl9ElU/oWlkgSfaX/L3Vnd29jMh5xrpGRo/syahgySYiPZrG29+ qhqBnOQ+GMfc1gSji2Jca2bp/OJE1NFIghLIQxiw7vC+NeMRSz3M10Ferdoet/xc hwatQJp8p0UdcTQiqQPW+cakxs980ll7Mse+O9ka3A5pwtinIGBONCH5jRh938Ow reK7SsFK9RkqrySsoHZRo1xSp1jvF0wK3Z1gZxn00fkVQDiFGAU=
    =yhwO
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marco d'Itri@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Fri Nov 8 23:50:01 2024
    On Nov 08, Bastien Roucariès <[email protected]> wrote:

    Does it seems a reasonable assumption to use a domain for an host even if it is localdomain or test ?

    Do you think it is a good idea to set the testbed hostname to a FQDN ?
    Please do. This has been a pain for the INN CI as well.

    --
    ciao,
    Marco

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iHUEABYIAB0WIQQnKUXNg20437dCfobLPsM64d7XgQUCZy6UTAAKCRDLPsM64d7X gYOAAQCaTx2N41UHFtiuJ7vb2uZH/BYNjKjzxNakaJNz5ijR4QD/bfHCPYyeI3Yx vsPCZ1aB3qZBSEGbQFGTyTrZcB9NRgs=
    =Dsgu
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bastien =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roucari=E8s?@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 24 11:17:13 2024
    Le vendredi 8 novembre 2024, 22:44:28 UTC Marco d'Itri a écrit :
    On Nov 08, Bastien Roucariès <[email protected]> wrote:

    Does it seems a reasonable assumption to use a domain for an host even if it is localdomain or test ?

    Do you think it is a good idea to set the testbed hostname to a FQDN ?
    Please do. This has been a pain for the INN CI as well.

    Thanks marco

    How can we get some improvment on this side ?

    can you get me some pointer to the code to change ?

    Bastien




    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEXQGHuUCiRbrXsPVqADoaLapBCF8FAmdDCzkACgkQADoaLapB CF/V7w//Z6Cnhe9HEOU5EiRYr46vePrf9XCCHt4p01CAJ3BEBUbRDGnoH5764UxT Cbh8lWPz4n0tTdkFBGlGLJDPgHrGwFojISuYzcor6R7R9iA2NG1QfzvSRB68Dqz+ P9MD6k2FRdrasFNyECsXNT9GHkUmRYoIRaAftPstuM/1h48jlfcJnfQg6Zz46CgY vOVQJgD6XQZHyF3Tx3wI9seVy6cEC+ssPhkSKfVbJ/U86nmvS5zIdNMszFCOJaFm GoHjqhmotkvatLd/9y26yfLQOxrwcTt9Bkf0Lz60BAYWFraaAlYfepndjPWe7a3c lEjvy1p2ggXXWG+jECgfioCZOKfN3y+mVLDaIxVRGPiPJzMKDrYgJK/KbZ54L8sN Jg0FB92jmnaCn0pGK/ckfjkyDUsqD0cTDaq+3Ny9abdy0k5/o4zl55vLlwo7U2Ag OYJb/s5tiuqEyeiwiLG58y73jpBnpdXvamlTV0cmMzUqAfDpJ8jF1MJCgnQeHwJI ob5AnTEMSuv8XB6P4oIZnB6FNO1upNYxDaQbFnP3ITrgqYJ1JjdlYlU+pAd1FBS9 70R0bfGlZmqN8jf1AzxYwGlpdju6foSHMdbasY+533OkjejZBIxT/RXrFNYqUJOy KA16tfaOmiEB3GjJ8+gWwPVDWBxrXebcURymw7RIDJinNfUb57M=
    =+y+L
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marco d'Itri@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Nov 24 15:50:02 2024
    On Nov 24, Bastien Roucariès <[email protected]> wrote:

    Do you think it is a good idea to set the testbed hostname to a FQDN ?
    Please do. This has been a pain for the INN CI as well.

    Thanks marco

    How can we get some improvment on this side ?
    Just set in the CI containers/guests an hostname which resolves to the
    local IP (even if it is a private IP).

    --
    ciao,
    Marco

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iHUEABYIAB0WIQQnKUXNg20437dCfobLPsM64d7XgQUCZ0M8JgAKCRDLPsM64d7X gZpmAP9vqUs++COKSbeOjHEr2n0CmFF5TKk/lcsJ6meMR0AOHQEA4ZGBzpTT+ppI ezFchj5muNY4kcJ4t/sAxP3DNJ0tsQ4=
    =IVhm
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Simon McVittie@21:1/5 to Marco d'Itri on Sun Nov 24 17:40:02 2024
    On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 at 15:45:58 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
    On Nov 24, Bastien Roucari�s <[email protected]> wrote:
    Do you think it is a good idea to set the testbed hostname to a FQDN ?
    Please do. This has been a pain for the INN CI as well.

    A test with needs-root or needs-sudo should be able to set this up for
    itself, if that's a requirement (you might also want to set breaks-testbed
    to guarantee that any changes will be reverted before subsequent testing).

    If you have a test dependency on libnss-myhostname, you should be able to
    set the hostname to any FQDN of your choice (perhaps
    "$(hostname --short).autopkg.test"?) and it will still resolve successfully.

    I personally think the testbeds should probably *not* have a FQDN by
    default, because many end-user systems will not, and having to set one
    up acts as documentation that INN is (presumably?) one of the minority
    of packages that do genuinely need this.

    smcv

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)