From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/8771
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: u-uy74@aetey.se
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general
Subject: Re: Re: Would love to see reconsideration for domain and
 search
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 09:20:25 +0100
Message-ID: <20151025082025.GI28311@example.net>
References: <CAO_RewaaFU=RmDPHNwpaCg=FsoG+dqr4NV-QXY=fAkVYnsS-Jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151023052625.GD55813@wopr.sciops.net>
 <CAO_RewYQWuOUwKVNjX_j_S2-khuP9Z7XRZGcff=XKZXvoBtzeg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151024220215.GV8645@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445761267 6073 80.91.229.3 (25 Oct 2015 08:21:07 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 08:21:07 +0000 (UTC)
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Original-X-From: musl-return-8784-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun Oct 25 09:21:02 2015
Return-path: <musl-return-8784-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>
Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200])
	by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <musl-return-8784-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>)
	id 1ZqGY0-0002ZR-T3
	for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 09:21:01 +0100
Original-Received: (qmail 17417 invoked by uid 550); 25 Oct 2015 08:20:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
Original-Received: (qmail 16375 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2015 08:20:57 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fripost.org; h=
	in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:content-type
	:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:subject:from:from
	:date:date; s=20140703; t=1445761246; x=1447575647; bh=RGgb3J2ik
	OTxYFh7rKR64uhUxP4UU4sBTgDPuLOhmyQ=; b=u1WekuXq703XSUu9E8ZuHT738
	/FrlRpMfWfLJDeAzWSRqnVzp5WWNhZo74axDdkMHeLnAArhvP9I4Wi05bD+nqB+P
	aZLTp3II084+oSjC2cstYQaUZ4S8F3B+whjsgYCK1MLQVYyIjJzL1uTc/CXZI/u9
	GGtWKf5xksJVp5467c=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at fripost.org
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151024220215.GV8645@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:8771
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/8771>

On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 06:02:15PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> The only place adding search support might negatively impact existing
> musl users is by causing hostnames with no dots to be queried with the
> (often useless and unwanted) default domain set by dhcp before
> failing. My preference would probably be having musl default to
> ndots=0 rather than ndots=1 so that search has to be enabled
> explicitly.

+1

> Are there any reasons this would be undesirable?

I don't think so.

On the other side, the "design" of resolv.conf is far from well thought
out or consequent (given that there is no standard, to begin with).
So whatever you do, there of course will be people expecting/wanting a
different behaviour. Sigh.

Rune