Tanks. I'll make this change upstream in Debian too.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1680811
Title:
Request to add wireguard interface to interface-order
To manage notifications
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1663345
Title:
10-15 seconds delay until host is resolved
To manage
Please post the output of /usr/share/resolvconf/dump-debug-info run from
a terminal.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1663345
Title:
10-15 seconds delay until host is resolved
To
Wait a sec, I just noticed that you have the line "nameserver 127.0.0.1"
in your /etc/resolvconf/resolv.conf.d/head file. Remove that line, it
shouldn't be there.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Make sure "RESOLVCONF=no" in /etc/default/bind9. If not, set
RESOLVCONF=no in /etc/default/bind9 and restart.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1663345
Title:
10-15 seconds delay until
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1663345
Title:
10-15 seconds delay until host is resolved
To manage notifications
Have you unintentionally installed either the dnsmasq or the bind9
package?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1663345
Title:
10-15 seconds delay until host is resolved
To manage
I revised the patch slightly (to put the wl* names with the wifi* names)
and have applied it to the Debian package which I plan to release soon.
** Attachment added: "interface-order-patch_20170213-th1"
Hi, I understand why you might suggest this but on balance I don't think
that resolvconf should be so verbose in normal operation.
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
I am not convinced that this patch is correct. (I will look more
carefully when I return from a trip.)
Are you aware that resolvconf by default (unless
TRUNCATE_NAMESERVER_LIST_AFTER_LOOPBACK_ADDRESS=no) truncates the list
of nameservers after a loopback address?
** Changed in: resolvconf
Right, I think the file should only document the Ubuntu-specific things
such as the facts that by default resolvconf and the systemd resolver
are used, NetworkManager is used by default on Desktop and ifup on
Server, and so on. There have been hundreds of questions about these
basic things on
If such a comment were to be added then in order not to mislead it would
have to take into account the configurability of various components. So
you'd have to say something like:
«If the line "nameserver 127.0.0.53" is present then it probably refers
to the systemd resolver listening on the
NetworkManager is starting a dnsmasq instance whereas it shouldn't do
that any more.
** Package changed: dnsmasq (Ubuntu) => ubuntu
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1637700
Title:
Compare bug #1631241.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1637700
Title:
Caching dnsmasq stops resolving after some time
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Edit /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf and comment out the line
"dns=dnsmasq" with a leading '#'. Then reboot.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1637700
Title:
Caching dnsmasq
In yakkety there is no longer supposed to be a local forwarding
nameserver (instance of dnsmasq) listening at 127.0.1.1. Instead an
instande of resolved is started. Name resolution requests are fed to it
via the name service switch (configured with nsswitch.conf) rather than
via the libc resolver
Vincent: Which VPN client are you using?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1169437
Title:
network-manager does not configure local resolver or dnsmasq to use
the nameserver addresses
You may be encountering a new problem. For background read this thread:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2016-May/039350.html
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1169437
QkiZ: Can you please provide details of the malfunction in your case?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1169437
Title:
network-manager does not configure local resolver or dnsmasq to
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1072899 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1072899
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1072899
NetworkManager receives two VPN nameserver addresses but sends only one to
dnsmasq
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1628552
Title:
Are there cases where the interface is configured properly but
resolv.conf is not updated to include material from the dns-* lines?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1628552
Title:
on
Obviously the presence of material in the "base" file should have no
effect on the processing of material from /etc/network/interfaces. Are
you still sure that material from /e/n/i is sometimes incorrectly
omitted from the /etc/resolv.conf file?
--
You received this bug notification because you
Comment lines from the "base" file are always omitted from resolv.conf.
Try adding a line "search bogus.com“ and see if "bogus.com" shows up on
the "search" line in resolv.conf.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Hi and thanks for the report. How 'bout a patch?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1610479
Title:
interface-order needs definitions for systemd predictable names
To manage
Try doing "pactl upload-sample
/usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/glass.ogg bell.ogg" and "xset b
on" and "xset b 100".
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1599599
Title:
System beep
Thanks for the bug report. Yes, this is a bug. Here's a patch I have
applied to the Debian version which will appear shortly in Debian
resolvconf version 1.80. This should fix the bug in the Ubuntu version
of the package when it's merged.
** Attachment added: "resolvconf_bug_1593489_patch"
This possibly arises from bug #1003842.
What is possibly happening: the second or third nameserver on the list
of available nameservers supplied to dnsmasq replies quickly to
dnsmasq's query with a negative answer and dnsmasq immediately passes
that negative answer back to the resolver.
When
** Summary changed:
- DNS resolution stops working after sometime
+ DNS resolution stops working after some time
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1522057
Title:
DNS resolution stops
** Changed in: dnsmasq (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1577720
Title:
dnsmasq resolves xyzzy.xyzzy.xyzzy. to unknown IP
To manage
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1003842 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842
What remains unexplained is why the dnsmasq package was installed on
your machine at all. Is it the case that dnsmasq was not installed
before the upgrade and it was installed after the upgrade? In that
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1003842 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1003842
dnsmasq sometimes fails to resolve private names in networks with
non-equivalent nameservers
** Package changed: resolvconf (Ubuntu) => dnsmasq
That name service does not work properly when dnsmasq is installed is
most probably due to bug #1003842. If that is the case then if you
remove 8.8.8.8 from the list of nameserver addresses then name service
will work reliably.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Everything looks correct. Does name service work both when dnsmasq is
installed and when it is not installed? If so then there is no problem.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1575644
If you install the dnsmasq package then that package starts a standalone
instance of the dnsmasq program and resolv.conf will contain a line
`nameserver 127.0.0.1` which tells the resolver to consult that instance
of the dnsmasq program, which will by default forward DNS queries to the
nameservers
Not dnsmasq but dnsmasq-base is pulled in by ubuntu-desktop.
If you define your interfaces statically using /etc/network/interfaces
then you have to add the nameserver information to
/etc/network/interfaces on lines like "dns-nameserver 1.2.3.4". See
resolvconf(8) for more info.
** Changed in:
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1003842 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842
This is the known bug #1003842. Workaround: comment out "dns=dnsmasq" in
/etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1003842
dnsmasq sometimes fails to resolve
** Description changed:
- resolveconf does not reliable receive nameserver information from
- network manager.
+ resolvconf does not reliable receive nameserver information from
+ NetworkManager.
In the journal I see things like:
Apr 11 11:13:52 ottawa dnsmasq[3122]: setting upstream
br matching was added to interface-order in Debian release 1.77, thus in
wily which has resolvconf 1.77ubuntu1.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1384394
Title:
br matching was added to interface-order in Debian release 1.77, thus in
wily which has resolvconf 1.77ubuntu1.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1384394
Title:
/etc/network/interfaces:
The content of the base file is processed, but due to resolvconf's rules
they may fail to show up in resolv.conf. Comments in the base file get
discarded. Lines like "nameserver w.x.y.z" are omitted if another line
is, e.g., "nameserver 127.0.1.1.". If you set
The service is called "bind9-resolvconf" but you said you ran "sudo
systemctl start bind9-resolv.conf" and "sudo systemctl stop
bind9-resolv.conf". Look carefully at the spelling.
** Changed in: bind9 (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you
The service is called "bind9-resolvconf" but you said you ran "sudo
systemctl start bind9-resolv.conf" and "sudo systemctl stop
bind9-resolv.conf". Look carefully at the spelling.
** Changed in: bind9 (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you
Do you have the "dnsmasq" package installed and is the instance of the
dnsmasq program started by the "dnsmasq" package configured to listen at
127.0.1.1?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
Do you have the "dnsmasq" package installed and is the instance of the
dnsmasq program started by the "dnsmasq" package configured to listen at
127.0.1.1?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
First, it appears that NetworkManager doesn't handle the error well and
retries without sleeping. Needs fixing.
Separate issue: Why is the error occurring on your machine? Why do you
get "dnsmasq[30613]: failed to create listening socket for 127.0.1.1:
Address already in use"?
--
You received
First, it appears that NetworkManager doesn't handle the error well and
retries without sleeping. Needs fixing.
Separate issue: Why is the error occurring on your machine? Why do you
get "dnsmasq[30613]: failed to create listening socket for 127.0.1.1:
Address already in use"?
--
You received
To prioritize pdns-recursor's listen address in resolv.conf, edit
/etc/resolvconf/interface-order and replace the line
lo.!(pdns|pdns-recursor)
with the following line.
lo.*
See https://bugs.debian.org/308677 for background.
** Package changed: resolvconf (Ubuntu) => pdns-recursor
Try purging and reinstalling the resolvconf package.
Is there anything unusual about your machine?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1525613
Title:
package resolvconf 1.78ubuntu1
** Package changed: resolvconf (Ubuntu) => dnsmasq (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1516329
Title:
DNS BUG delay resolution of LAN DNS
To manage
** Package changed: resolvconf (Ubuntu) => dnsmasq (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1516329
Title:
DNS BUG delay resolution of LAN DNS
To manage notifications about this bug
> I put it to you that this design is defective if it does not consider
this important use case.
If that is an important use case then of course it should be supported.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1042275 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1042275
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1042275
Please enhance dnsmasq to talk directly to resolvconf and to register only
its actual listening address(es)
--
You received this bug notification
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1042275 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1042275
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1042275
Please enhance dnsmasq to talk directly to resolvconf and to register only
its actual listening address(es)
--
You received this bug notification
Can you please try to figure out what part of the resolvconf postrm
script is yielding the exit status 128?
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: Expired => New
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1473727
Title:
No
Best to submit this wish to the Debian bug tracking system so that
Debian will also benefit from this enhancement.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1485316
Title:
Best to submit this wish to the Debian bug tracking system so that
Debian will also benefit from this enhancement.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1485316
Title:
dnsmasq breaks DNS,
Is the resolvconf package even installed?
Assuming it is, why doesn't it get called when the interfaces are
configured?
Can things be changed so that resolvconf does get called in the normal
way when interfaces are configured? (The normal way and all other
things resolvconf are explained in
Here is a rough draft, untested, of a script that would be run once in
the main boot sequence in order to bring the resolvconf database up to
date. The main difference from your script is that it sends the info to
resolvconf instead of writing directly to resolv.conf. (I am assuming
that
Hi there and thanks for your report.
I don't see any evidence here of a bug in resolvconf. There is most
probably something wrong with your machine's configuration. So this
report should be reassigned to something else... or closed if the
configuration shortcomings are purely local. Where did you
Christian, the workaround is to comment out the line dns=dnsmasq in
/etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842
Title:
dnsmasq sometimes fails to
Christian, the workaround is to comment out the line dns=dnsmasq in
/etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842
Title:
dnsmasq
To add that, or any other, option to resolv.conf permanently, add the
line
options edns0
to the file
/etc/resolvconf/resolv.conf.d/base
and then resolvconf will include it in the resolv.conf that it
generates.
** Changed in: dnsmasq (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Invalid
--
You
To add that, or any other, option to resolv.conf permanently, add the
line
options edns0
to the file
/etc/resolvconf/resolv.conf.d/base
and then resolvconf will include it in the resolv.conf that it
generates.
** Changed in: dnsmasq (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Invalid
--
You
Hi. I don't see how resolvconf could be responsible for this problem.
Initial observation: it seems that dig gets the correct answer from
dnsmasq when it supplies the additional option udp:1280, but the glibc
resolver doesn't get the right answer from dnsmasq when it fails to
supply that option.
Hi. I don't see how resolvconf could be responsible for this problem.
Initial observation: it seems that dig gets the correct answer from
dnsmasq when it supplies the additional option udp:1280, but the glibc
resolver doesn't get the right answer from dnsmasq when it fails to
supply that option.
Should this be reassigned to network-manager-openvpn?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1430077
Title:
[vivid] VPN connection breaks /etc/resolv.conf
To manage notifications about this
** Changed in: network-manager (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress = New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842
Title:
dnsmasq sometimes fails to resolve private names in networks
** Changed in: network-manager (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress = New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842
Title:
dnsmasq sometimes fails to resolve private
** Summary changed:
- network-manager dnsmasq openvpn DNS issue
+ network-manager does not configure local resolver or dnsmasq to use the
nameserver addresses received from the VPN server
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
Now, it is being pushed instead to /etc/resolv.conf.
nameserver 10.99.244.1
nameserver 127.0.1.1
[...]
Connecting to the VPN also pushes search paths to /etc/resolv.conf -
overriding the search
domains that I have already configured, and which should take precedence.
Is this being
Does this bug still affect anyone?
** Changed in: network-manager (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/434477
Title:
Nameserver addresses
This bears a suspicious similarity to the behavior reported in the
AskUbuntu question #631810.
http://askubuntu.com/questions/631810
Are you running a local nameserver such as dnsmasq from the dnsmasq
package? Is there a nameserver listening at 127.0.0.1?
--
You received this bug
Michel, is this bug now fixed?
** Changed in: network-manager-openconnect (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1300097
Title:
NetworkManager
Michael, have you made any progress in figuring out the cause of this
bug?
** Changed in: network-manager-openconnect (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
A workaround may be to edit /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf and
comment out the line dns=dnsmasq.
** Description changed:
- Using a laptop with a hardware switch for enable/disable WLAN.
- Connected to two different LANs using DHCP on ETH/WLAN.
+ I have a laptop with a hardware switch to
** Summary changed:
- Nameresolution not working using openconnect
+ Name resolution not working using openconnect
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1311308
Title:
Name resolution not
@Seth: Unless you prefer to drop the matter entirely, I'd suggest you
edit the bug description to say exactly what it is that you want, as you
know see it. This isn't very clear in the original posting, and after
re-reading many of the comments above I don't feel I have a completely
clear picture
Hmm, well I don't think that this bug report is incomplete. We know
what the problem is. What is unfinished is the implementation of the
solution.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1163147
Public bug reported:
The following versions of resolvconf have a postinst that runs update-
rc.d resolvconf defaults.
* 1.77ubuntu1 YES
* 1.76ubuntu1 in Vivid 15.04 YES
* 1.69ubuntu4 in Utopic 14.10 YES
* 1.69ubuntu1.1 in Trusty-updates YES
* 1.69ubuntu1 in Trusty 14.04 YES
* 1.63ubuntu16 in
You know, I didn't even look closely at those warnings. Duh. Now that I
read them I see that I am being warned that I have runlevel symlinks in
1 2 3 4 5. Those aren't supposed to be there! (I run Ubuntu 15.04
upgraded from 14.04 originally.) What the aytch-e-double-hockey-stick?
Consider the
Fixed upstream in resolvconf 1.77.
** Changed in: resolvconf (Debian)
Status: In Progress = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1446681
Title:
resolvconf
Fixed in resolvconf 1.77ubuntu1.
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1446681
Title:
resolvconf interface-order
Yay.
We may now get a complaint from someone who has deleted the symlink at
/etc/resolv.conf but still has resolvconf installed and relies upon
dhclient updating /etc/resolv.conf dynamically. Their problem:
/etc/resolv.conf is no longer updated after resolvconf is upgraded to
1.77ubuntu1.
Fixed in 1.77ubuntu1.
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1279760
Title:
Resolvconf creates
debian/templates in 1.77ubuntu1:
[...]
Template: resolvconf/link-tail-to-original
Type: boolean
Default: false
[...]
debian/changelog in 1.77ubuntu1:
[...]
- resolvconf/link-tail-to-original debconf question again defaults to
false; it's rather irrelevant as we install resolvconf by
@Cs-gon: Can you reproduce this problem (bug #1392297) with resolvconf
1.77ubuntu1?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1392297
Title:
resolvconf 1.69ubuntu1.1 breaks network install
To
This was fixed in some release prior to 1.77ubuntu1.
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1085849
Title:
Please
** Changed in: resolvconf (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Incomplete
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1392297
Title:
resolvconf 1.69ubuntu1.1 breaks network install
To manage
The indirection via /etc/resolvconf/run dates from the era before /run/.
I introduced resolvconf in 2003 as part of a larger effort to make it
possible to run Debian with a read-only root filesystem[1] but the
project to introduce the /run/ tmpfs into Debian base failed due to lack
of consensus
Yep, I see that debian/triggers is present in 1.77ubuntu1, and when I
install the package I see the report of the trigger being processed.
Thx! P.S. Is there something we should do to silence those insserv
warnings?
$ sudo dpkg -i resolvconf_1.77ubuntu1_all.deb
(Reading database ... 282465 files
Resolvconf 1.77ubuntu1's debian/rules runs dh_installinit with `--no-
start` and so there is no longer a `invoke-rc.d resolvconf start` (which
wipes runtime directories) in debian/postinst. To enable resolvconf
updates, postinst simply does resolvconf --enable-updates.
If `invoke-rc.d resolvconf
Continuing with my investigation of how a default symlink field got
created for resolvconf on my machine... (What I am calling a 'default
symlink field' is the set of symlinks /etc/rc[1-5].d/S??resolvconf -
../init.d/resolvconf as would be created by update-rc.d resolvconf
defaults with
@Martin: Ubuntu resolvconf 1.76.1ubuntu2 includes the trigger-sending
and trigger-processing section at the end of the postinst but fails to
include the debian/triggers file from Debian. Without this file the
resolvconf package doesn't register an interest in the trigger
resolvconf-enable-updates.
I'd like to comment on the remaining differences between Debian
resolvconf and Ubuntu resolvconf.
Besides the extensive source-textual differences arising from Debian's
use of /etc/resolvconf/run versus Ubuntu's direct use of
/run/resolvconf, I see only three substantial differences.
1. The
@Martin: My previous comment raced with your release of 1.76.1ubuntu2.
Looks good.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1453185
Title:
resolvconf: updates are not enabled right after
@Cs-gon: Do you have any problem with resolvconf 1.76ubuntu1?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1392297
Title:
resolvconf 1.69ubuntu1.1 breaks network install
To manage notifications
In the Debian postinst there is a case clause at the end whose purpose
is to enable updates. In Debian this is done by means of a trigger.
resolvconf 1.77
[...]
case $1 in
reconfigure)
resolvconf --enable-updates
;;
configure)
Just to note that nowadays, e.g., in 1.76ubuntu1, Ubuntu also does
`dh_installinit --no-start`.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1085862
Title:
#DEBHELPER# token is in the wrong place,
1 - 100 of 3724 matches
Mail list logo
