Re: unable to get /etc/resolv.conf and /etc/network/interfaces configured properly in wheezy
On Mon, 19 Aug 2013 11:15:29 -0500, Mark Copper wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2013 20:28:04 -0500, Mark Copper wrote:
>>> With resolvconf package installed and configured for dynamic
>>> generation of /etc/resolv.conf, I was *unable* to get any non-local
>>> nameservers written into /etc/resolv.conf.
>>
>> Is "/etc/resolv.conf" a link?
>
> it's a symlink to a symlink!
>
> uppose the culprit is the change made to the interfaces file.
I don't think that the change to the interfaces problem would do that.
When you say symlink to symlink, do you mean that "/etc/resolv.conf"
points at "/etc/resolvconf/run/resolv.conf" and that
"/etc/resolvconf/run" points at "/run/resolvconf"?
If you modify "/run/resolvconf/resolv.conf", is the change reflected in
"/etc/resolv.conf"?
>>> Previously, my file followed this format for multiple IP addresses on
>>> a single nic like this (cf
>>> https://wiki.debian.org/NetworkConfiguration):
>>>
>>> auto eth0 eth0:1
>>>
>>> iface eth0 inet static
>>> address 192.168.1.42
>>> netmask 255.255.255.0
>>> gateway 192.168.1.1
>>> dns-nameservers 8.8.8.8
>>>
>>> auto eth0:1
>>> allow-hotplug eth0:0
>>> iface eth0:1 inet static
>>> address 192.168.1.43
>>> netmask 255.255.255.0
>>
>> You have "allow-hotplug eth0:0" without an "iface eth0:0 ..." line.
>
> I think I do, but why is it necessary? I thought it was only for
> dynamic changes. and this server never needs them.
"iface ..." defines the interface and "allow-hotplug ..." allows udev to
hotplug it. Without "iface ...", "allow-hotplug ..." is of no use. You
must have meant to have "allow-hotplug eth0:1", not "allow-hotplug eth0:0".
>>> but both /etc/init.d/networking reload and restart had separate
>>> problems besides not solving my resolv.conf problem. So I tried the
>>> newer format at the bottom of the same wiki.debian.org page like this:
>>>
>>> auto eth0
>>> allow-hotplug eth0
>>> iface eth0 inet static
>>> address 192.168.1.42
>>> netmask 255.255.255.0
>>> gateway 192.168.1.1
>>> dns-nameservers 8.8.8.8
>>>
>>> iface eth0 inet static
>>> address 192.168.1.43
>>> netmask 255.255.255.0
>>
>> You have two "iface eth0 ..." lines.
>
> strange, but it's in the wiki.
I'm sorry. I've just looked at the wiki and I didn't know that there was
a new (?) iproute configuration style. It's too bad that the developer
didn't get rid of the "netmask" line and use "address 192.168.1.42/24"
instead. I assume that it's for backward compatibility but it'd be nice
if both were possible.
Reply to: