On 12/07/2011 08:52 PM, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > In which case it would not work anyhow - the boot string is embedded > inside the binary and a re-compile cannot be avoided. Yes I know, my point is that the user is not exposed to the fact that his IP address is being used. Before, the developer did know that his IP is used in the binary, because he put it in there himself, so he knows to do the right thing. > I think we are not talking about casual users using boot-wrapper in > any case. It's just a question of making it easy for developers to run > the whole setup. Agreed, my point is that if it is being done by a script that is called without the user being aware of it, then even a developer might miss the fact that the output is specific to the host IP address. Setting it in a config file or Makefile makes it pretty clear, even if by default we but with backticks a command returning the current IP; however the way it is now, where it is being called transparently from Make, it can be confusing, because even developers are usually not used to this kind of sorcery. Actually, it is worse than that; the current behavior doesn't just require a recompile, a make clean is required as well. Make doesn't detect that the host IP has changed. These things might be obvious to us, but if you have not read the code they are very far from that. > > Personally, I just want to go to the boot-wrapper directory, do 'make' > and be on my merry way. Not copy output from ifconfig manually and > stuff if I can avoid it. I agree with that, I just wanted to point out the potential for confusion.
