On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 04:50:54PM +0200, Lukas Tribus wrote: > > Well, sometimes when you're debugging a configuration, it's nice to be > > able to disable some elements. Same for those manipulating/building > > configs by assembling elements and iteratively pass them through > > "haproxy -c". That's exactly the reason why we relaxed a few checks in > > the past, like accepting a frontend with no bind line or accepting a > > backend with a "cookie" directive with no cookie on server lines. In > > fact we could simply emit a warning when a resolvers section has no > > resolver nor resolv.conf enabled, but at least accept to start. > > Understood; however in this specific case I would argue one would > remove the "resolver" directive from the server-line(s), instead of > dropping the nameservers from the global nameserver declaration.
No, because in order to do this, you also have to remove all references on all "server" lines, which is quite a pain, and error-prone when you want to reactivate them. > Maybe a config warning would be a compromise for this case? Yes, that's what I mentionned above, I'm all in favor of this given that we can't objectively find a valid use case for an empty resolvers section in production. Cheers, Willy
