On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 5:05 PM, /dev/rob0 <r...@gmx.co.uk> wrote:
> > On 10/11/2012 15:54, /dev/rob0 wrote: > > >Seems to me that dnsmasq is a better nscd replacement, and > > >it has a place in mobile computing. > > > > > ># we use this dnsmasq as this system's own resolver > > >no-resolv > > On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 05:46:10PM -0600, > richardvo...@gmail.com wrote: > > no-resolv is doing more harm than good. > > > > dnsmasq is smart enough to ignore 127.0.0.1 in /etc/resolv.conf > > And it will automatically pick up DHCP-assigned DNS servers which > > written there. > > But you don't understand. The point of dnsmasq on a laptop is to > serve ONLY that machine and its local processes. /etc/resolv.conf > must contain ONLY "nameserver 127.0.0.1". If there are other > nameservers listed, the system resolver will be contacting them; > possibly getting different results, and ... well, this discussion > would not be relevant to the dnsmasq list. > > I don't know where you got this piece of misinformation. Multiple nameserver entries in /etc/resolv.conf work fine, as long as the localhost entry (pointing to dnsmasq) comes first.
_______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
