resolv.conf questions

Fri Aug 9 16:45:03 UTC 2019

At Fri, 9 Aug 2019 14:07:43 +0200 "Ubuntu user technical support,  not for general discussions" <ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com> wrote:

> 
> On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 22:53, Tomas Zubiri <me at tomaszubiri.com> wrote:
> >
> > https://askubuntu.com/questions/662863/manually-edit-dns-in-ubuntu-14-04
> >
> > Dear Ubuntu developers, /etc/ files are user interfaces, stop breaking them.
> >
> > Thank you very much.
> 
> Please bottom-post on mailing lists.
> 
> Sadly, though, I have to disagree.
> 
> Linux is big business now. Mostly on servers.
> 
> The only significant user-facing ones are Android and ChromeOS, which
> are both dramatically constrained systems, which is part of why
> they've been successful. It is taking desktop distro vendors *way* too
> long to catch up with what they are doing, but distros like Endless,
> and to a lesser extent Fedora Silverblue, are showing the way:
> * all apps containerised; no inter-app dependencies at all
> * OS image shipped as a complete, tested image
> * Most of the filesystem is read-only
> * no package manager, no end-user ability to install/remove/update
> packages. You get a whole new OS image periodically, like on a phone.
> * OS updates are transactional: it deploys the whole thing, and if it
> doesn't work, it rolls back the entire OS to the last known good
> snapshot. 2+ OS snapshots are maintained at any time so there should
> always be a good one.
> 
> This is a good thing. Software bloat is vast now. OSes are too complex
> for most people to understand, maintain, or fix. So you don't. Even
> the ability is removed.
> 
> This is in parallel with server deployments:
> * everything is virtualised: OSes only run in VMs with standardised
> hardware, the network connections are virtualised, the disks are
> virtualised.
> *  VMs are built from templates and deployed automatically as needed,
> and destroyed again as needed.
> * there is as little as possible local state in any VM. It gets its
> state info automatically from a database over the network. The
> database is in a VM too, of course.
> * as few local config files as possible; config is kept in a database
> too and pushed out to local database instances
> 
> I could go on.
> 
> Unix is a late-1960s OS designed for late-1960s minicomputers:
> * big standalone non-networkerd servers with lots of small disks,
> shared by multiple interactive users on dumb text terminals
> * users built their own software from source
> * everything is a text file. Editors and piping are key tools.
> 
> With some 1970s tech on top that the industry spent 25 years getting
> working stably:
> * framebuffers and hi-res graphic displays are possible but very expensive
> * so, design for graphical terminals, or micros that are dedicated
> display servers
> * programs run over the network, executing on 1 machine, displaying on another
> * Ethernet networking has been bolted on. TCP/IP is the main protocol.
> * because GUIs and networking are add-ons, they break the "everything
> is a file" model. This is ignored. Editors etc do not allow for it yet
> alone use it.
> * machines treat one another as hostile. There is no federation, no
> process migration, etc.
> 
> Then in the 1980s this moribund minicomputer OS got a 2nd lease of
> life and started selling well because microcomputers  got powerful
> enough to run it, growing up into expensive high-power workstations:
> * some effort at network integration: tools were bolted on top for
> distributing text-only config files automatically, machines could
> query each other to find resources
> * encryption was added for moving stuff over untrusted networks
> * a lot of focus on powerful programming tools and things like maths
> tools, 3D modelling tools
> * very little focus on user-friendliness or ease of use, as that
> sector was dominated by Macs, Amigas etc.
> * much of this stuff is proprietary because of the nature of the business model.
> * server support is half-hearted as there are dedicated server OSes for that
> 
> In the 1990s things changed again:
> * plain cheap PCs became powerful enough to run Unix usefully
> * the existing vendors flailed around trying to sell it but mostly
> failed as they kept their very expensive pricing models from the
> workstation era
> * FOSS re-implementations replace it, piggybacking on tech developed for Windows
> * After about 1Â½ decades of work, the leading FOSS *nix becomes a
> usable desktop OS. Linux wins. FreeBSD trails, but has some good work
> -- much of this goes into Mac OS X
> 
> Early 21st century:
> * high-speed Internet access can be assumed

Um...  Nope.  NOT A GOOD ASSUMPTION.  *I* am *still* using Dial-up Internet.

*Much* of rural America *does not have* high-speed Internet.  Really!

> * non-technical end-users become a primary "market"
> * now it runs on local 64-bit multi-CPU micros with essentially infinite disk
> * it has a local 3D accelerator for a display
> 
> Results...
> * traditional troubleshooting/fault finding is obsolete. No need for
> keeping admin tools separate from user tools, no need for /bin and
> /sbin, /usr/bin and /usr/sbin, etc. Boot off a DVD or a USB, recover
> user data if any, nuke the OS and reload.
> * GUIs favour 3D chrome. When harmony is achieved & everyone
> standardises on GNOME 2, Microsoft attacks it and destroys it,
> resulting in vast duplication of desktop functionality and a huge
> amount of wasted effort.
> * Because of poor app portability between distros, just like in the
> days of proprietary Unix, only a few big-name apps exist for all
> distros.
> * Linux is mainly only usable for Web/email/chat/simple office stuff,
> and traditional coder work. Windows and Mac hoover up all of the
> rich-local-apps market, including games. Linux vendors do not even
> notice.
> * Linux on conventional desktops/laptops is weak, but that market is
> shrinking fast. But...
> * not-really-Linux-any-more phone/tablet OSes are thriving
> * consumer Internet use is huge, for content consumption, social
> networking, and retail
> 
> This drives a need for vast server farms, with the lowest possible
> unit software cost.
> * tools for automation -- for deployment, management, scaling -- are big money
> * because the job market is huge, skill levels are relatively low, so
> automated distribution of workloads is key:
> - tools for deploying & re-deploying VM images automatically in case
> of failure of the contained app
> - tools for large teams to interwork on incremental, iterative
> software development
> - bolting together existing components, automated building and testing
> and packaging and deployment
> * as the only significant successful end-user apps are web browsers,
> all tools move onto the web platform:
> - web mail
> - web chat
> - web media
> - web file storage
> - web config management
> * Result: tooling written in Web tools -- JavaScript -- displaying
> over Web UIs (browser rendering engines)
> * On the server end, inefficiency can be solved by deploying more
> servers. They're cheap, the software is free.
> * On the client end, most focus is on fast browsers and using games
> acceleration hardware to deliver fast web browsing, media playback,
> and hardware accelerated UI
> 
> So the only possible method of fighting back and trying to deliver
> improved end-user tooling for power users is to use a mixture of web
> tools and games hardware.
> 
> Result: OSes that need 3D OpenGL compositing, with desktops and apps
> written in JavaScript, and packaging and deployment methods taken from
> those designed for huge server farms.
> 
> * GNOME 3 and Cinnamon, and a distant 3rd, KDE. (The only others are
> principally defined by refusal to conform.)
> * Flatpak, Snappy and a distant 3rd, Appimage
> * systemd and an increasing move away from text files, including for
> config and logging -- server farm tools use database connections,
> because in the 1980s & 1990s, nobody saw any reason to try to copy
> Microsoft's LAN Manager, domains, Novell NDS, Banyan VINES' Streetalk,
> or any other more sophisticated LAN management tools.
> 
> Gosh. That turned into quite a rant.
> 
> Anyway. The Linux desktop is going to continue to move away from
> familiar *nix ways because they are historical now. Because the Linux
> desktop is only a tiny parasite on the flank of the _vast_ Linux
> server market, it gets tooling designed for that.
> 
> If you want a more traditional Unix experience, try FreeBSD. It's
> thriving off the move to systemd and so on.
> 
> 

-- 
Robert Heller             -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software        -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/  -- Linux Administration Services
heller at deepsoft.com       -- Webhosting Services