On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 21:59:29 +0100 Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org> wrote: > On Sun, 5 Nov 2023 20:41:44 +0100 Sylvain Garrigues > <sylv...@sylvaingarrigues.com> wrote: > > Le dimanche 5 novembre 2023, Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org> a écrit : > > > > > > > > See https://salsa.debian.org/systemd-team/systemd/-/merge_requests/162 > > > > > > > > This is indeed related. Yet the changes (as of today) do not seem to fix > > the order for `resolve'. This merge request seems to be waiting for a > > consensus before it can make progress. > > Indeed, we don't have a consensus yet what the correct ordering is, if > there is such a thing. > As for myself, I don't have a strong opinion. > > Aspects to consider: > - systemd upstream recommendations > - seeing how other distros are doing it > - our status quo (which sort of works in the absence of bug reports) > > Given all involved packages, another problem is the order in which > packages are installed. I fear, we can't solve this with the current > setup/infrastructure, where every package on its own mangles > /etc/resolv.conf > > We'd need something like Gioele's idea for dh-nss v2, where > /etc/resolv.conf is compiled from a list of config files that are > provided by packages shipping NSS modules. > > Gioele has a much more intimate grasp on this matter, so I've CCed him.
I don't think anybody else here has the required knowledge to provide any more info than we already have. Gioele could you please make a recommendation and update the MR so that we can do something, one way or the other? -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
