Alkis: Why do you need the dnsmasq package at all? You want NM and dnsmasq. Why not just use the NM-enslaved dnsmasq?
If the latter doesn't meet your needs, could it be adapted somehow to meet your needs? Assuming that there are good reasons for using NM and standalone dnsmasq, I'd be inclined to agree with Alkis (if I understood him correctly) that a good solution would be to put the NM-dnsmasq integration stuff into a package and make this conflict with the standalone dnsmasq package. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop Packages, which is subscribed to network-manager in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/959037 Title: Local resolver prohibits DNS servers from running Status in “dnsmasq” package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in “network-manager” package in Ubuntu: Triaged Bug description: As described in https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-p-dns- resolving, network manager now starts a dnsmasq instance for local DNS resolving. That breaks the default bind9 and dnsmasq installations, for people that actually want to install a DNS server. Having to manually comment out "#dns=dnsmasq" in /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf doesn't sound good, and if it stays that way, it should be moved to the bind9 and dnsmasq postinst scripts. Please make network-manager smarter so that it checks if bind9 or dnsmasq are installed, so that it doesn't start the local resolver in that case. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dnsmasq/+bug/959037/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~desktop-packages Post to : desktop-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~desktop-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
