> Am 24.02.2021 um 20:19 schrieb Lennart Poettering <mzerq...@0pointer.de>: > > On Mi, 24.02.21 12:49, Paul Wouters (p...@nohats.ca) wrote: > > > I think the caching and DoT stuff that resolved provides is useful on > any system, and that includes servers, and I think it would be good to > minimize the difference in the APIs (and that includes D-Bus APIs) > when we can. So I'd recommend doing resolved on server images too.
You have a good point about caching. And I like the emphasis on usability (in an earlier post. That may be one reason for the wide acceptance of systemd, despite all the criticism). But for Fedora Server, I definitely want an unmissable indication of a configuration error (and log entries are too easy to miss, especially when I don't see a problem). So instead of (more or less silent) fallback, a fail. For Fedora Workstation, I see resolved as a real step forward. But for Fedora Server it would need a tighter integration of / cooperation with libvirt virtualisation and also NetworkManager in the medium term. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
