I reformatted over 14.04 and installed 16.04 as a fresh start. I use a
slightly customized server install ISO image that includes my own
preseed file for automation. My approach is to start with a bare-bones
server install on all machines and then install extra packages based on
the machine's function (ubuntu-desktop on workstations, for instance).
According to my installation logs, dnsmasq was installed during an
"apt-get install ubuntu-desktop unity-tweak-tool" on a workstation
(which of those two packages actually resulted in a dependency on
dnsmasq I don't know), and on a server it was installed during an
"apt-get install polipo".
Michael
On 04/28/2016 06:01 AM, Thomas Hood wrote:
> *** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1003842 ***
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1003842
>
> What remains unexplained is why the dnsmasq package was installed on
> your machine at all. Is it the case that dnsmasq was not installed
> before the upgrade and it was installed after the upgrade? In that case,
> please file a new bug report describing that particular misbehavior.
>
I reformatted over 14.04 and installed 16.04 as a fresh start. I use a
slightly customized server install ISO image that includes my own
preseed file for automation. My approach is to start with a bare-bones
server install on all machines and then install extra packages based on
the machine's function (ubuntu-desktop on workstations, for instance).
According to my installation logs, dnsmasq was installed during an
"apt-get install ubuntu-desktop unity-tweak-tool" on a workstation
(which of those two packages actually resulted in a dependency on
dnsmasq I don't know), and on a server it was installed during an
"apt-get install polipo".
Michael
On 04/28/2016 06:01 AM, Thomas Hood wrote: /bugs.launchpad .net/bugs/ 1003842
> *** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1003842 ***
> https:/
>
> What remains unexplained is why the dnsmasq package was installed on
> your machine at all. Is it the case that dnsmasq was not installed
> before the upgrade and it was installed after the upgrade? In that case,
> please file a new bug report describing that particular misbehavior.
>