[Bug 991308] Re: Dnsmasq fails to resolve if any upstream nameserver is unreachable

2012-11-14 Thread William Lightning
Appologies, this is no longer an issue for me in 12.10. -- 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/991308 Title: Dnsmasq fails to resolve if any upstream nameserver is

[Bug 991308] Re: Dnsmasq fails to resolve if any upstream nameserver is unreachable

2012-07-30 Thread William Lightning
I may need to look in logs, I'm not 100% it's lookup that's failing it. Just figured I'd mention it here. -- 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/991308 Title: Dnsmasq fails

[Bug 991308] Re: DNS Querying fails if any DNS server is unreachable

2012-06-22 Thread William Lightning
aparently I spoke to soon =( -- 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/991308 Title: DNS Querying fails if any DNS server is unreachable To manage notifications about this

[Bug 991308] Re: DNS Querying fails if any DNS server is unreachable

2012-06-22 Thread William Lightning
Yes, it happens with dnsmasq by itself. However it appears that dnsmasq is caching the result, so when it sees a good one it will keep serving it. Here is some example output from the syslog: Jun 22 13:42:18 archon dnsmasq[9635]: started, version 2.59 cachesize 150 Jun 22 13:42:18 archon

[Bug 991308] Re: DNS Querying fails if any DNS server is unreachable

2012-06-22 Thread William Lightning
Just noticed this as well: http://mydeviceinfo.comcast.net/device.php?tier=-1devid=298e=0d3=0s=nso=0sc=1546 To quote the red bit at top: Comcast has identified a software defect on the Arris TG852 and TG862, which may cause problems for a small number of users attempting to use third party DNS

[Bug 542005] Re: faulty symlinks on mounted samba volumes

2010-04-26 Thread Lightning
I checked, You're right. It confused me that this have been changed just like that in the next version (for me) . But the question is still there: Why can't unix extension and wide links work together? I know it a security hole, but I really need this option one way or another. -- faulty

[Bug 542005] Re: faulty symlinks on mounted samba volumes

2010-04-12 Thread Lightning
I don't get it what example you're exactly expecting but here is the full story: I have 4 software raid arrays of 2 hard drives. (So md0 is the system's, md1 and md2 are storages, and md3 is for a kvm guest.) Symlinks already existed and newly created work properly on md1, only inside the

[Bug 542005] Re: faulty symlinks on mounted samba volumes

2010-04-01 Thread Lightning
Of course, even more: smb.conf: http://pastebin.com/96W66mun Versions: libpam-smbpass 2:3.4.0-3ubuntu5.6 libsmbclient 2:3.4.0-3ubuntu5.6 libwbclient0 2:3.4.0-3ubuntu5.6 samba 2:3.4.0-3ubuntu5.6 samba-common 2:3.4.0-3ubuntu5.6 samba-common-bin 2:3.4.0-3ubuntu5.6 samba-doc 2:3.4.0-3ubuntu5.6

[Bug 542005] Re: faulty symlinks on mounted samba volumes

2010-03-25 Thread Lightning
** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete = Confirmed -- faulty symlinks on mounted samba volumes https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/542005 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to samba in ubuntu. --

[Bug 542005] Re: faulty symlinks on mounted samba volumes

2010-03-25 Thread Lightning
I've experienced this (or something same) recently too on 9.10 server, Samba 3.4.0. I'm not sure since when is this lasting but I think upgrading the devicekit-* package today might caused it.? That was the last thing I did before noticed this bug... It only affects symlinks and only on certain

[Bug 542005] Re: faulty symlinks on mounted samba volumes

2010-03-25 Thread Lightning
In my case wide links is disabled ever since I use Samba. The ordinary symlink doesn't work if unix extension is enabled at the same time. By doesn't work I mean they don't have any file permissions or even details just '?' marks instead. It's been working until yesterday... I'll be more