4 ms·

Orthopedic surgeons must love systemd articles because of all the knee jerking happening. The systemd-resolved fallback is 1) configurable by the distro and end

Orthopedic surgeons must love systemd articles because of all the knee jerking happening. The systemd-resolved fallback is 1) configurable by the distro and end user [0] and 2) a really useful feature since broken DNS causes a lot hard to solve problems. The fallback is only used when the network connection is otherwise configured and functional but no DNS servers have been defined and the entry isn't in the hosts file. The daemon respects DHCP and manually provided servers and even the hosts file before it tries a fallback. Modern distros rely heavily on DNS because their package infrastructure is almost all load DNS load balanced groups of servers. So gone are the days where a public package mirror was just an IPv4 address and a base path, i.e. a singular server. A mirror may not have the same IP address day to day. A distro disabling the fallback is stupid. Fedora should have at least provided some addresses for the fallback even if they didn't want to use Google. As for the "hurr durr why does my init system have a DNS resolver?" type questions it's just painful to see that level of ignorance in what seem to be smart people. Systemd contains an init system but it's a project providing a number of system daemons (oh shit the name makes sense). It uses a bunch of useful modern Linux features. I'm partial to the "hurr durr Unix philosophy!" arguments. They're particularly tone deaf on systems loaded with awk, sed, bash, perl, web browsers, m4, ssh, and emacs. The "Unix philosophy" is a decent idea but not a suicide pact. If you hate systemd go use a distro without it, there's plenty. You can also use one of the BSDs. You've got options. But if you don't "trust" systemd or just hate it at least have an informed position about it. A dumb commit made without understanding or thinking about the consequences is on the distro maintainer, not the upstream project. [0] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Systemd-resolved#Fallback https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Systemd-resolved#Fallba...

Already__Taken 6y ago
> A dumb commit made without understanding or thinking about the consequences is on the distro maintainer, not the upstream project. I think that's unfair they had clearly put a lot of thought into it. I'd argue this is a very clear-cut case of letting perfect be the enemy of good and software engineers thinking they're lawyers. Might want to get some real legal advice on the matter if you're potentially leaving a user without a system that can't research the problem. It's not even clear what part of data controllers and/or processor means to the providers of software users choose to install in which a system default fallback makes the Fedora org subject to GDPR. AWS might want to worry if they're providing the running Fedora system for me.
- giantrobot 6y ago
  > I'd argue this is a very clear-cut case of letting perfect be the enemy of good and software engineers thinking they're lawyers. That's why the Fedora commit was stupid. It didn't solve any technical issues, it didn't consider negative side effects, and was completely unnecessary.
Daho0n 6y ago
>Fedora should have at least provided some addresses for the fallback even if they didn't want to use Google. I have no problem with systemd but no, the OS should absolutely most definitely never use any other DNS than what is supplied to it from either the user or the network. Not only could the server some day become malicious but it is also extremely bad practice to hardcode something like this, even for fallback. It should fail loudly (edit: and if systemd really want a fallback, ask the user if they want to use a fallback on failure before using it).
matheusmoreira 6y ago
> It uses a bunch of useful modern Linux features. That's the best thing about it too. It deliberately makes use of Linux features, making it much better than portable lowest common denominator software. Cgroups really does make services more manageable since even badly behaving forking daemons can't escape.
iforgotpassword 6y ago
Neither Windows nor macos do this and it seems usability is fine. Linux has a long way to go to get on par with those two for the average Joe, and no, having DNS fallback absolutely won't help with that. Note that the article specifically mentions cloud deployments breaking, so this isn't even something that a novice user will encounter, although it confirms my impression that the cloud is being used a lot by some of the greatest idiots in tech.

Already__Taken 6y ago

> A dumb commit made without understanding or thinking about the consequences is on the distro maintainer, not the upstream project. I think that's unfair they had clearly put a lot of thought into it. I'd argue this is a very clear-cut case of letting perfect be the enemy of good and software engineers thinking they're lawyers. Might want to get some real legal advice on the matter if you're potentially leaving a user without a system that can't research the problem. It's not even clear what part of data controllers and/or processor means to the providers of software users choose to install in which a system default fallback makes the Fedora org subject to GDPR. AWS might want to worry if they're providing the running Fedora system for me.

giantrobot 6y ago
> I'd argue this is a very clear-cut case of letting perfect be the enemy of good and software engineers thinking they're lawyers. That's why the Fedora commit was stupid. It didn't solve any technical issues, it didn't consider negative side effects, and was completely unnecessary.

Daho0n 6y ago

>Fedora should have at least provided some addresses for the fallback even if they didn't want to use Google. I have no problem with systemd but no, the OS should absolutely most definitely never use any other DNS than what is supplied to it from either the user or the network. Not only could the server some day become malicious but it is also extremely bad practice to hardcode something like this, even for fallback. It should fail loudly (edit: and if systemd really want a fallback, ask the user if they want to use a fallback on failure before using it).

matheusmoreira 6y ago

> It uses a bunch of useful modern Linux features. That's the best thing about it too. It deliberately makes use of Linux features, making it much better than portable lowest common denominator software. Cgroups really does make services more manageable since even badly behaving forking daemons can't escape.

iforgotpassword 6y ago

Neither Windows nor macos do this and it seems usability is fine. Linux has a long way to go to get on par with those two for the average Joe, and no, having DNS fallback absolutely won't help with that. Note that the article specifically mentions cloud deployments breaking, so this isn't even something that a novice user will encounter, although it confirms my impression that the cloud is being used a lot by some of the greatest idiots in tech.