Comment 5 for bug 1745463

> Flexibility for flexibility's sake is not a goal of Ubuntu.

Hmmmm...flexibility for the sake of making a system work seems like a good goal. As a user of Linux for 18 years, and one that has used Ubuntu since its very first release, I can say with confidence that Linux is absolutely about choice and flexibility. Any distro that forgets this fact has limited or short-lived success.

> resolved is not configured as a caching nameserver; it is a stub resolver,
> configured for the purpose of ensuring a stable DNS endpoint.

Perhaps I've conflated resolved with the NetworkManager dnsmasq instance, which is most definitely configured as a caching resolver (and the first iteration of this type of default setup in Ubuntu, also a nightmare for crusty old *nix users). My understanding, based on the documentation, is that resolved acts as a caching resolver. systemd-resolved.server(8) states very clearly:

"systemd-resolved is a system service that provides network name resolution to local applications. It implements a caching and validating DNS/DNSSEC stub resolver, as well as an LLMNR resolver and responder."

> Enabling a local resolver on servers in addition to desktops (where we have
> already enabled dnsmasq for years) has been a common request.

Consider this a request to allow an Ubuntu system to work without dnsmasq or any other local caching resolver. I'm sure it's not the first nor the last.

There are definitely scenarios where running dsnmasq as a local (caching?) resolver is inappropriate and I'm happy to give a few scenarios, but that's not what _this_ _bug_ is about. This bug is about a defect in the resolvconf and resolved dhclient integration scripts.

Philosophical discussion aside, I have reported a valid bug that will definitely affect some number of Ubuntu users. I've also provided a safe, simple, straightforward fix to this bug. It's an improvement to the software.

Unless the fix is technically unsound, there is absolutely no reason not to implement it.