[Dnsmasq-discuss] Struggling with multiple nameservers
boss at northfrost.com
Sun Jan 12 22:20:40 GMT 2020
On 12/01/2020 15:40, Geert Stappers wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 10:33:43PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 04:37:32PM +0000, Harry Moyes wrote:
>>> On 08/01/2020 14:47, wkitty42 at gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On 1/7/20 2:10 PM, Harry Moyes wrote:
>>>>> dnsmasq very usefully reports the compiled in options with the -v flag.
>>>>> The pihole derivative has lost that rather useful feature, so
>>>>> exactly what options it has been complied with is hard to tell.
>>>> personally speaking, i'd see what it would take to regain that
>>>> functionality by contacting the pihole devs and bringing this defect to
>>>> their attention and possibly use your situation as an example...
>>> I've already mentioned this to the developers.
>> Any prove of that?
>>> The change is apparently intentional.
>> Assumed or documented?
> My questions from above are indeed terse.
> Let me elaborate
> |> > I've already mentioned this to the developers.
> |> Any prove of that?
> That question was written in the hope of getting an URL or email
> where can be read what was mentioned to the pihole developers.
> I still hope such email or URL pops up. The idea is to ask,
> differently as previously, to regain the lost functionality.
> Geert Stappers
Unless it has gone missing somewhere I have already replied to the question.
I misunderstood the response I got from the pihole-FTL developers.
pihole-FTL -v does not respond as dnsmasq does. Intentionally.
However if you submit the request as
pihole-FTL -- -v
you get exactly the same response as from dnsmasq including the compiled
The subtly of the extra "--" passed me by initially.
As I said in my previous post, if I had understood the reply I got
better, I'd have saved myself a load of pain.
Other than possibly making that subtlety more obvious to the slower on
the uptake among us, like me, there is nothing else required here.
More information about the Dnsmasq-discuss