Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make
Ubuntu better.
This sounds like something that should be decided upon by the upstream
dnsmasq project, and not in Ubuntu directly. Could you check validity
with their current latest release, and if still relevant, file a bug
with them please?
Since this behaviour appears to be intentional, I'm marking this bug
Won't Fix for Ubuntu, as I don't think we should patch this. If upstream
decide to change behaviour, then this can change.
** Tags added: need-upstream-report
** Changed in: dnsmasq (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Won't Fix
** Changed in: dnsmasq (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Low
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to dnsmasq in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1619422
Title:
dnsmasq cache-size is hardcoded to 10000
Status in dnsmasq package in Ubuntu:
Won't Fix
Bug description:
Most people won't run into this problem, but if you use a very large
hosts-file (like this one here: http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/) you
fill up the cache completely. No matter what you set for cache-size,
the maximum possible value is hardcoded in the file option.c of the
dnsmasq sources.
As there is no indication of this arbitrary limit , you might end up
wondering: why the hell is dnsmasq not caching anything?
The value was probably put there to save resources if dnsmasq runs on
an embedded system and users who need a bigger cache size can setup
their patched instance of dnsmasq, but there should be at least some
kind of warning in the default config file.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dnsmasq/+bug/1619422/+subscriptions
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
