On Mon 31 Mar 2025 at 11:19:30 (-0400), gene heskett wrote: > The dns problem is separate I guess, but does bring up my other pet > peeve. That is that no one at debian considers the effect on dns to > those of us who have been using hosts files for local dns since back > in the late 90's I have no dhcpd setup and rig my lashup so that my > local lookups are first and in the hosts file, if not it the hosts, my > isp's dns gets queried. But every new install changes things around > resolv.conf making that harder and harder to do.
I don't understand. You have a router running dd-wrt, don't you. https://wiki.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Static_DHCP explains how to configure it to hand out static addresses, yet you maintain that it can't do that, eg: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2023/12/msg00009.html > What makes the debian people treat hosts file users, like 3rd class > users? Its easier to setup, needs less maintenance, and Just Works > since my first linux install in '98... Sure, we can lock NM from > tearing a working net down by making resolv.conf immutable and a real > file. We no longer have to do that with bookworm but from wheezy to > bookworm we did have to protect resolv.conf from NM. But every time > we mention it, we catch it by giving us what for w/o telling us how to > make it work. That too gets old. Why? I don't know why you have problems with using /etc/hosts for lookups on your LAN. I use it here without any problems, and it has to work because there's no DNS server in my router (too cheap). $ grep hosts: /etc/nsswitch.conf hosts: files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns $ The hosts file is just a reformatted list of the Reserved Addresses list from the router, with my "fake" domain (.corp) added, and it gets consulted first. The main advantage of using my router to hand out static addresses is that it includes printers, scanners, mobile phones, TVs and set-top boxes, stuff that I don't want to bother with configuring myself, plus the fact that it's always powered on. [ … ] > Sorry to disappoint you but that seems to be working Just Fine, but > once again, you make no attempt to either explain why its wrong, or to > tell us what the right way is other than demanding we waste a week > making dhcpd actually work. Then why the complaint? Cheers, David.
