3 ms·

Any modern distro using a systemd resolver is one meant for the kind of people that don't care about taking back control, because they will be layman users. You

Any modern distro using a systemd resolver is one meant for the kind of people that don't care about taking back control, because they will be layman users. You are of course correct that this then does not apply to them, but I would argue this is kind of an obvious point.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
usr1106 8y ago
I don't want to participate in the discussion whether systemd and systemd-resolved are good or bad or for laymen or not. My only point was if you want "to take control" of your system you first have to look /etc/nsswitch.conf. If "resolve" is before "dns" your /etc/resolv.conf is mostly unused. Any article discussing /etc/resolv.conf without mentioning /etc/nsswitch.conf is very misleading for many users who happen to have systemd-resolved (probably because the distro decided to install and configure it)
- usr1106 8y ago
  Actually another daemon that seems to be deeply hardwired into glibc is nscd(8). All applications I have traced recently try to open the nscd socket. Whether nscd is still installed by any distro by default I don't know. I haven't seen it running for years.
- xvYXA 8y ago
  I guess the discussion is a bit heated because distros keep breaking stuff that worked 10 years ago. It would be fine if overall reliability increased, but it does not. I could write more reliable shell scripts for making WiFi or PPP connections than NetworkManager, which sometimes required a reboot before graciously allowing to connect again. Never happens on the command line. Thank you for describing the status quo, I'll probably look into Slackware or OpenBSD now.
  - zcid 8y ago
    My suggestion for Linux right now is Void Linux. It's clean and minimalist and eschews systemd for runit. It feels a lot like OpenBSD without ports (although the manpages are sadly Linux-like).
- esjeon 8y ago
  I don’t see any point of leaving resolved behind once both NM and nsswitch are configured to ignore resolved. Disabling resolved pretty much does a half of the trick without modifying a major system config file anyway.
oblio 8y ago
Debian, Ubuntu and the vast majority of their derivatives use systemd. Fedora and Red Hat and the vast majority of their derivatives use systemd. OpenSUSE and SUSE and the vast majority of their derivatives use systemd. In most production environments bar custom distributions used by Google & co. (and those are a minority), systemd is used, presumably with the systemd resolver. I'm not sure I'd call all users of commercial Linux distributions "laymen" :)
- yrro 8y ago
  > Debian, Ubuntu and the vast majority of their derivatives use systemd. Debian doesn't use nss-resolve(8) by default though. I'd be very surprised if RHEL or any other other distros suitable for a "production environment" were to take that step given systemd-resolved's current level of maturity. (This is not a knock at systemd-resolved; I use it myself on most of my machines, but unless you want to spend a lot of time debugging weird resolver issues I would not recommend doing so until it has matured a bit more.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

usr1106 8y ago

I don't want to participate in the discussion whether systemd and systemd-resolved are good or bad or for laymen or not. My only point was if you want "to take control" of your system you first have to look /etc/nsswitch.conf. If "resolve" is before "dns" your /etc/resolv.conf is mostly unused. Any article discussing /etc/resolv.conf without mentioning /etc/nsswitch.conf is very misleading for many users who happen to have systemd-resolved (probably because the distro decided to install and configure it)

usr1106 8y ago
Actually another daemon that seems to be deeply hardwired into glibc is nscd(8). All applications I have traced recently try to open the nscd socket. Whether nscd is still installed by any distro by default I don't know. I haven't seen it running for years.
xvYXA 8y ago
I guess the discussion is a bit heated because distros keep breaking stuff that worked 10 years ago. It would be fine if overall reliability increased, but it does not. I could write more reliable shell scripts for making WiFi or PPP connections than NetworkManager, which sometimes required a reboot before graciously allowing to connect again. Never happens on the command line. Thank you for describing the status quo, I'll probably look into Slackware or OpenBSD now.
- zcid 8y ago
  My suggestion for Linux right now is Void Linux. It's clean and minimalist and eschews systemd for runit. It feels a lot like OpenBSD without ports (although the manpages are sadly Linux-like).
esjeon 8y ago
I don’t see any point of leaving resolved behind once both NM and nsswitch are configured to ignore resolved. Disabling resolved pretty much does a half of the trick without modifying a major system config file anyway.

oblio 8y ago

Debian, Ubuntu and the vast majority of their derivatives use systemd. Fedora and Red Hat and the vast majority of their derivatives use systemd. OpenSUSE and SUSE and the vast majority of their derivatives use systemd. In most production environments bar custom distributions used by Google & co. (and those are a minority), systemd is used, presumably with the systemd resolver. I'm not sure I'd call all users of commercial Linux distributions "laymen" :)

yrro 8y ago
> Debian, Ubuntu and the vast majority of their derivatives use systemd. Debian doesn't use nss-resolve(8) by default though. I'd be very surprised if RHEL or any other other distros suitable for a "production environment" were to take that step given systemd-resolved's current level of maturity. (This is not a knock at systemd-resolved; I use it myself on most of my machines, but unless you want to spend a lot of time debugging weird resolver issues I would not recommend doing so until it has matured a bit more.