Re: Editing the DNS with Network Manager Non Root
On Fri 13 May 2022 at 17:27:30 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 03:39:39PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > But the next paragraph talks of the file "/etc/resolvconf.conf",
> > which has nothing to do with the resolvconf /package/, but is the
> > configuration file for the /openresolv/ package.
>
> What? WHAT?!?
>
> You know, I REALLY TRY.
I know. And your posts here certainly add more value to the list
than mine ever do.
> Oh, and maybe whichever HALFWIT decided that there should be a program
> named resolvconf and a configuration file named resolvconf.conf and
> that these two should be UNRELATED TO EACH OTHER should stop inflicting
> their decisions on Debian. Just a thought.
Yes, it's odd. There are other cases where programs share the same
name. Usually these things are resolved (no pun intended) with
/etc/alternatives/, but here they seem to use Provides/Conflicts, and
those keywords only appear under openresolv, so if you look for
resolvconf in the Packages file, its entry carries no hint of the
existence of openresolv.
> If my BEST EFFORTS fall that far short, then whatever. Maybe instead
> of berating the wiki and the hard-working editors who TRIED OUR DAMNED
> BEST to figure this shit out and document it for the world, you could,
> like, help out? Make it better?
>
> *snort* Yeah. Right.
Well, I've looked at these pages in the past, but never in any depth
because pkg resolvconf has been a luxury (originally installed IIRC
when I was playing with free vpns to download the odd BBC programme).
It always worked with wicd running the wifi, and I didn't give it
much thought.
Then last autumn, Stella posted about iwd, which interested me on
account of the demise of wicd. As you can see from my posts, I was
only aware of resolvconf and systemd-resolved as alternatives. (You
contributed at one point.)
But with the new year, I took up the idea of using iwd myself.
Unfortunately I got sidetracked by the buster version which, counting
in iwd-years, came out of the ark.
By mid-March, I'd figured that out, connected with both versions,
but left buster by the wayside (posting some caveats IIRC), and
concentrated on configuring bullseye.
Interestingly, I used the archlinux wiki, and some posts it referred
to, to hack the snag that iwd is unable to update /etc/resolv.conf
without realising that it documents openresolv, not resolvconf (but
uses the other name).
But I went on to try using systemd-resolved to see if that produced
a "cleaner" configuration, ie one without said hack. This was partly
on account of Thomas Pircher's post which uses a real pick'n'mix of
methods to configure the network.
But AFAICT it seemed that systemd-resolved was aimed more at programs
withing to call on a program to resolve an address for them, rather
than just maintain /etc/resolv.conf for competing interests. So it
was either slow, or failed, obviously waiting for something to time
out somewhere.
During April, the penny dropped that there were resolvconf and
openresolv packages, completely distinct, and so I downloaded
openresolv on May3 and installed it on May4. By May8, I was happy
enough to settle on openresolv as a replacement for resolvconf,
as it worked well with iwd and systemd-networkd. It does require
a three-line hack as above. I wrote that I would likely post it.
I haven't yet tested this configuration on the road, so to speak,
so do you think I'd pass as a past master at this game.
> But, hey. You know what WORKS?
>
> chattr +i /etc/resolv.conf
>
> THAT ONE WORKS!! EVERY TIME!
>
> But smug assholes in IRC insist that it's "wrong", or that it incurs
> something they call "technical debt", whatever the hell THAT means,
> and they keep trying to smother it.
I didn't know the jargon, but the definition seems reasonably clear.
We hear about systems on this list where quick and dirty workarounds
have accumulated until it's very difficult to diagnose any problems
because nothing is configured quite as it should be.
> Well, guess what?
>
> If the "right ways" to do this ONE SIMPLE THING are so convoluted and
> incomphrensible that we can't even DOCUMENT THEM correctly, maybe they
> aren't so "right" after all!
Well, AFAICT if you're using openresolv, then it looks as if
resolvconf=NO in /etc/resolvconf.conf should be pretty watertight,
assuming we don't have a yes≢true scenario like last week's.
OTOH it doesn't look easy with the resolvconf package. If you use
systemd's ability to mask the service, it's not clear whether you'd
get the desired fixed value at all.
But that could be completely simplistic, or just plain wrong.
> P.S. this is the sanitized version of this email. You're welcome.
This is the stream of consciousness version of this email.
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: