On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 09:44:13AM -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > After reading https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/8967, I really > don't think that systemd-resolved's benefits outweigh its harms as a > default resolver for Fedora. If someone wants to write a > libfriendlydnsresolver and encourage/patch programs to use it instead of > using glibc's resolver or reading resolv.conf, then that could be debated > on its merits. But the actual contents of /etc/resolv.conf should follow > the relevant standards, and systemd-resolved does not. > > Perhaps systemd-resolved could change its mind and decide to comply with > all relevant standards. But until then, it seems inappropriate to me for > it to be the default in Fedora. Pfff, now I'm confused. Here is a case where systemd-resolved implements the standard, and some people were unhappy because they were relying on sloppy implementations which don't follow the RFC. Nevertheless, we added an opt-in switch to make this work. (Since this feature mostly matters in "special" setups like k8s, where you need to do a lot of local setup anyway, requiring a one-line option seems to be reasonable). Zbyszek _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
