On 27/05/12 17:58, Simon Kelley wrote: > Executive summary: non-equivalent servers are bad, but --strict-order > will make things work, for the same value of "work" as the libc > resolver). Non-equivalent servers are bad, so don't encourage their > use by making --strict-order the default.
To be frank, when changing the default system resolver, expected behavior should be the default. It's all well and good saying that non-equivalent resolvers are 'bad' - and in the case of dnsmasq, that might be true - but that's a value judgement that shouldn't have a place in this scenario, since users haven't made the choice to enable dnsmasq, and so shouldn't have to be aware of the caveats (ie - "My DNS worked fine before upgrade"). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842 Title: Precise NM with "dns=dnsmasq" breaks systems with non-equivalent upstream nameservers To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/1003842/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
