<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><br><div dir="ltr"><blockquote type="cite">Op 23 mei 2021 om 20:17 heeft Ercolino de Spiacico <bellocarico@hotmail.com> het volgende geschreven:<br><br></blockquote></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
I didn't try but I suppose the --test parameter works. However this
is not my point.<br>
<p>I would like dnsmasq to stop (prevent execution) only for very
serious matters like incomplete IP addresses in config, binding
port higher than 65K, etc. you name it.<br>
</p>
<p>I believe there is a rather long list of reasons (incorrect
dhcp-host syntax being one as per original message) that
could/should be excluded from this process execution control.</p></div></blockquote><div><br></div>It is impossible for software to decide what is a ‘serious matter’ and what isn’t.<div><br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><p>This takes nothing away from the fact that having a clear/clean
config is ultimately a must, I just don't want to have to call a
person in a different continent again because of a typo on a
"secondary" configuration parameter.<br></p></div></blockquote><div><br></div>You don’t have to. You can validate the config.</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><p>
</p>
<p>In one sentence: let's make dnsmasq as resilient as possible.<br></p></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The workflow should be as resilient as possible. Ergo, validate your config. You could add the validation command to ExecStartPre to prevent dnsmasq from restarting with a faulty config.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><p>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Thanks<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 23/05/2021 20:07, Lonnie Abelbeck
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:730DB004-A82B-4123-9482-28A71ECEAEF5@lonnie.abelbeck.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">On May 23, 2021, at 12:47 PM, Cyberfusion <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wedwards@cyberfusion.nl"><wedwards@cyberfusion.nl></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Op 23 mei 2021 om 19:31 heeft Lonnie Abelbeck <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:lists@lonnie.abelbeck.com"><lists@lonnie.abelbeck.com></a> het volgende geschreven:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">On May 23, 2021, at 11:08 AM, Cyberfusion <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wedwards@cyberfusion.nl"><wedwards@cyberfusion.nl></a> wrote:
Maybe it’s better to always validate the config before you restart dnsmasq.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""># dnsmasq --test
dnsmasq: syntax check OK.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Then the solution is to fix config validation, not add an option to ignore errors.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I was just indicating dnsmasq had a validation test, builtin.
Best if the original reporter (Ercolino) could recreate the syntax error and see if --test flags it.
Lonnie
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div></blockquote></div></div></body></html>