[Dnsmasq-discuss] Add address file option

[Christ Schlacta]

I personally disliek restarting dnsmasq because my headless systems  
often become confused and need to be either connected to a monitor or  
restarted to continue working as a result.  Very painful experience.

On an aside, I think adding a second hosts file with wildcards is a  
reasonable idea. As long as it's part of the dnsmasq config and not  
mistakable for the system one.  You can easily do that without binds  
if you can handle changes in etc hosts without binds.



On Mar 5, 2010, at 6:58, Simon Kelley <simon at thekelleys.org.uk> wrote:

> Don Muller wrote:
>
>> Well you could change the code to read from a file with the caveat  
>> the if
>> you are trying to bind to a port less than 1024 you have to do a  
>> restart.
>>
> I could, and then at some point in the future someone would complain,
> (legitimately) that it's really very confusing that a configuration  
> file
> which works fine when dnsmasq is started for the first time fails if
> it's re-read. Then I need to solve the problem that on a re-start  
> there
> can be no fatal errors - the daemon is running and has to continue
> running, so the effect of doing a re-load is that facilities that were
> working, mysteriously, partially fail. As a matter of design, it's
> problematic.
>
>
>> I'd be rather more inclined to extend the DBus interface, which  
>> allows
>>> dynamic setting of servers (but not source ports)
>>>
>>> I'm still bewildered why people are so allergic to restarting  
>>> dnsmasq:
>>> it takes almost no time, doesn't disrupt existing connections and  
>>> the
>>> only state lost is the cache, which is quickly and transparently
>>> replaced.
>>>
> Can anybody answer this?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Simon.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
> Dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
> http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-dis