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

Re: Sarge: name resolution weirdness

Carl Fink wrote:
So, do I hold the record for "questions debian-user can't answer"?

The broken link sounds like an issue for the maintainer to sort out. My guess is the name resolution with non-existent resolv.conf files is somehow related to virtualization.

Happy new year to everyone (who uses the Gregorian calendar--and to the rest
of you, too, just less appropriately).

On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 01:19:23PM -0500, Carl Fink wrote:
So yesterday my Sarge server couldn't resolve any host names.  Restarting
resolvconf did nothing.  Adding new servers to /etc/resolv.conf did nothing,
even though dig@thoseservers worked fine.

I finally apt-get removed resolvconf and then rebooted (virtual server via
Rimuhosting).  That worked.

Except since then I got no mail.  Almost all of my mail is forwarded via my
server (which answers to both finknetwork.com and fink.to) to my account on
Checking the mail logs on my box showed that panix.com was an "unknown
service".  Uh, what?  I could, for instance, ping Panix and it would work. I
could "dig -t mx panix.com" and be told that I needed mx.panix.com.  But
Postfix, only, couldn't resolve hostnames.

A bit of investigation showed that /etc/resolv.conf was a broken symbolic
link to a nonexistent /etc/resolvconf/run/resolv.conf.  Why?  I removed the
resolvconf package and rebooted--why would a reassignment like that happen? And in any case, how were other programs resolving if resolv.conf was

Recreating resolv.conf STILL didn't work, even after I restarted Postfix. I
had to reboot again.

I HATE rebooting Linux boxes (even virtual ones).  Hate it.

Does anyone have an idea what the heck happened?
Carl Fink nitpicking@nitpicking.com
Read my blog at nitpickingblog.blogspot.com.  Reviews!  Observations!
Stupid mistakes you can correct!

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: