On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 08:27:01PM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:

[cut]

>
> Why I've never understood is why it's not the default for a Debian
> installation to have its own nameserver.
>
> Is there a reason to trust anyone else's nameserver?
>

Well, the reason is simple: Debian was a project whose main objective
was to provide a Free Software Universal Operating Systems[1], not a
free DNS. We could also ask why on Earth Debian does not provide a
HTTP proxy. or an email relay, or a VPN service, or a general-purpose
IRC server, which are things that some users would really appreciate,
but the answer will be the same: Debian was meant to provide just an
operating system (a free software and universal one, though), a
selection of packages compiled for a certain platform who talk to each
other well, and among which a user can select those that better suit
their needs. Fullstop.

Up to wheezy, Debian has always been user-neutral (as promised by
point 6 in the DFSG [2].....), and was one of the few distributions
that were not "targeted" to any specific audience in particular. In a
word, a universal operating system.

What I didn't really expect was to see Debian force their users doing
anyhting in particular or having to accept a policy that is not
strictly related to package organisation and management, as it has
repeatedly (and sadly) happened in the last months. I bet this DNS
thing is just the tip of the iceberg, and more crap is already on its
way :(

We'd better have this Devuan thing up and running soon...

HND

KatolaZ


[1] https://www.debian.org/intro/about
[2] https://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines

--
[ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ --- GLUG Catania -- Freaknet Medialab ]
[ me [at] katolaz.homeunix.net -- http://katolaz.homeunix.net -- ]
[ GNU/Linux User:#325780/ICQ UIN: #258332181/GPG key ID 0B5F062F ]
[ Fingerprint: 8E59 D6AA 445E FDB4 A153 3D5A 5F20 B3AE 0B5F 062F ]