So after upgrading from 2.55 to 2.56 I am getting the following error at
startup:
dnsmasq: error at line 3 of /etc/dnsmasq.d/options.conf
Line 3 in that file is:
dhcp-mac=set:special,00:e0:91:*:*:*
So, this has worked happily for a while, but certainly w/ 2.55. Has
there been a
Ben wrote:
So after upgrading from 2.55 to 2.56 I am getting the following error at
startup:
dnsmasq: error at line 3 of /etc/dnsmasq.d/options.conf
Line 3 in that file is:
dhcp-mac=set:special,00:e0:91:*:*:*
So, this has worked happily for a while, but certainly w/ 2.55.
Am 15.02.2011 19:12, schrieb Jan Psota:
2011-02-14 20:37:57 Simon Kelley wrote:
Dnsmasq 2.56 is now available, download it from
[...]
To Gentoo users:
it is (2.56) in bleeding-edge overlay.
(since yesterday, of course! ;-)
FreeBSD now has 2.56_1,1 - it is 2.56 + the config file parser fix.
2011-02-16, 15:45:41 Matthias Andree wrote:
FreeBSD now has 2.56_1,1 - it is 2.56 + the config file parser fix.
Gentoo users have it too: bleeding-edge, 2.56-r1.
--
jasiu
Situation:
dnsmasq 2.56 supposed to answer all but loopback. named (system default
BIND 9.6.3, FreeBSD 8.2-PRERELEASE amd64) is bound to 127.0.0.1 and ::1
port 53, confirmed with lsof. dnsmasq config is as follows:
domain-needed
bogus-priv
no-resolv
no-poll
server=127.0.0.1
Matthias Andree wrote:
Situation:
dnsmasq 2.56 supposed to answer all but loopback. named (system default
BIND 9.6.3, FreeBSD 8.2-PRERELEASE amd64) is bound to 127.0.0.1 and ::1
port 53, confirmed with lsof. dnsmasq config is as follows:
domain-needed
bogus-priv
no-resolv
no-poll
Matthias Andree wrote:
Am 16.02.2011 10:51, schrieb Simon Kelley:
Ben wrote:
So after upgrading from 2.55 to 2.56 I am getting the following error at
startup:
dnsmasq: error at line 3 of /etc/dnsmasq.d/options.conf
Line 3 in that file is:
dhcp-mac=set:special,00:e0:91:*:*:*
Am 16.02.2011 17:41, schrieb Simon Kelley:
in that case, dnsmasq binds to 192.168.0.4 according to lsof.
Is this a known issue on FreeBSD? What means are there to resolve this
so that users don't fall into this trap?
The behavior is the same on all platforms.
Without