Debian
dnsmasq package

  1. Bug #1247803
  2. Comment #5

Comment 5 for bug 1247803

Revision history for this message
Philip Potter (philip-g-potter) wrote :

I don't really understand why we need to add a conditional at all. It's always safe to run resolvconf -u one time too many; but running it one time too few will introduce subtle bugs (like this one).

The proposed conditional only suppresses running resolvconf -u if ENABLED=1 and resolvconf is not being used (ie IGNORE_RESOLVCONF=yes). Is this really such a common case that adding complexity to get the minor optimization of not running resolvconf -u is worth it?

Also, doesn't your argument about ENABLED=0 later being changed to ENABLED=1 also apply to IGNORE_RESOLVCONF=yes later being changed to IGNORE_RESOLVCONF=no?

I'm still in favour of just unconditionally running resolvconf -u, as my branch does.