[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Resolvconf -- a package to manage /etc/resolv.conf

Are there plans to run "up" commands in interfaces after
dns-nameservers? Some of my up commands, and probably others, consist of
setting up static routes to other boxes. It is nice to be able to
specify these other boxes by name, and have it resolved using the name
servers set up by the resolvconf routine.

Also, this may seem a LITTLE bit silly, but can dns-domainnames be
provided with a name, which is then resolved into an IP and added to
resolvconf? This may seem a little pointless at first glance, but I (and
maybe others) run our own personal DNS servers at my house (on a dynamic
address), that I would like added into the resolv sequence, as a
secondary resolver, after the IPs my DHCP server gives me. It's amazing
what some people do to run a semi-functional network behind Comcast
cable! Yes, this obviously won't work for most of the names entered with
dns-nameservers, but not adding if not successfully resolved is a
perfectly acceptable fallback in this case. It doesn't take a whole lot
of time, and might be useful for somebody.

Awesome package. It has caused me to delete all of my dhclient-exit-hook

On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 22:27, Thomas Hood wrote:
> The resolvconf package provides a framework for dynamic updating
> of /etc/resolv.conf and other nameserver lists.  (See the long
> description at packages.debian.org/resolvconf .)
> The resolvconf package is now at version 0.44 in unstable.
> If you are interested in the package and haven't tested it in a while
> then now is a good time to test it again.  In order to test the
> installation procedure please purge any old version of resolvconf
> first.  Please report any bugs via the BTS.
> If no significant bugs are reported and if support is added to
> bind and bind9 (#199255) in time then I'll consider letting
> resolvconf migrate into sarge by closing #209265 with a 1.0
> release.
> -- 
> Thomas Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk>

Reply to: