On 05/16/2012 02:54 PM, JD wrote: > I understand the libs are what make calls to the resolver. But even > the resolver must look > at /etc/resolv.conf. Well, you did say: "Am I to believe that the browser is NOT using /etc/resolv.conf" which to me reads that you were thinking that somehow the browser itself should be using resolv.conf. I'm sorry if I misread what you wrote. > If it is empty, NOTHING gets resolved. Not "entirely" true. With named not running..... [egreshko@f16-1 ~]$ cat /etc/resolv.conf # Generated by NetworkManager #search greshko.com #nameserver 192.168.0.55 [egreshko@f16-1 ~]$ ping misty PING misty (192.168.0.55) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from misty (192.168.0.55): icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.99 ms since /etc/nsswitch.conf contains hosts: files dns and /etc/hosts contains 192.168.0.55 misty if you take the "files" out of the hosts line....then NOTHING gets resolved. > I was using nscd thinking it is a lightweight caching resolver. But as > it turns out it is useless. > Time for fedora to bury it :) > Re: My router: it does very little if any caching - and has no > configuration for it at all. > > I will try bind. I've not used it....but have heard good things about dnsmasq which, according to yum info, is A lightweight DHCP/caching DNS server. -- Never be afraid to laugh at yourself, after all, you could be missing out on the joke of the century. -- Dame Edna Everage -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
