Hi, I have submitted new package openresolv [1], which provides resolvconf tool, similar to Debian's resolvconf package. Why? I thought about common interface to various DNS cache implementations for workstations and different VPN providers available. While I think the best place to direct, which interface resolvers should handle given domains. resolvconf handles conflicting requests from different interfaces, when multiple DNS resolver providers are configured by connection. Current Fedora 33 already has /usr/sbin/resolvconf provided by systemd-resolved. It provides split-DNS implementation in default Fedora installation[2]. Problem is this is useful only in case systemd-resolved service is running and used. When it is disabled, its resolvconf just fails. But because systemd-resolved does not have its own subpackage, the daemon can be only disabled, not uninstalled. My question is, how should dhclient or vpn provider check resolvconf is installed and enabled? It usually checks [ -x /usr/sbin/resolvconf ] in Debian from shell, but because resolvconf is always present on Fedora, it cannot work. Unlike Debian, where systemd does not provide resolvconf. How could it therefore check, how should be /etc/resolv.conf updated? How would dhclient know, when to rewrite /etc/resolv.conf itself or when to use resolvconf for coordinated changes? I think Network Manager should manage DNS domains list per connection IMO. But in cases VPN provider is not configured via NM or NM is not even used, I think resolvconf is good alternative to set and restore the system's /etc/resolv.conf, when any VPN service is started. Only systemd-resolved and dnsmasq can support split-DNS from NM. openresolv is written only in shell, has no other dependencies. It could support multiple DNS implementations as a local cache[3]. It currently breaks systemd's symlink /usr/sbin/resolvconf, it uses alternatives links. But systemd package does not use it, so after uninstallation of openresolv, resolvconf remains broken. I think this has to be solved by systemd package. Do you have any opinion, how should resolvconf be supported on Fedora? Any opinion against it? 1. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/openresolv 2. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/systemd-resolved#Split_DNS 3. https://roy.marples.name/projects/openresolv/configuration/ -- Petr Menšík Software Engineer Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/ email: pemensik@xxxxxxxxxx PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
