Ken Dibble wrote:
> >> It is not an error for the script to "choose" not to start dnsmasq.

To whom are you attributing that quotation? I did not say it. Yet
you quote it in reply which others might then assume that I said it
when I did not. At no point in this thread has that sentence
appeared.

> I don't know what kind of bizzarro world you live in.

So first you cite as if I had said something that I never said and
then you accuse me of living in a bizzarro world? Apparently I am
living in reality. I have stated only the facts.

> If a program is called for a specific purpose and it "chooses" not to do
> what it was requested to do,
>
> reports no problems, doesn't do that job, and cannot even be bothered to
> report that it did not do what it
>
> was requested to do, it is broken.

If you want the program to do its job then you must have the program
installed.

Installing and then removing a program and then complaining that the
uninstalled program is not doing something after having uninstalled it
is just silly.

> Computer programs are supposed to report that they succeeded or failed at
> the requested action, they don't make people guess and they don't get to
> pick alternative actions. They are not supposed to report the requested
> action had no error if they didn't do the job. Anybody who thinks otherwise
> is wrong.

Said programs must be installed to function as intended.

> > > What error occurred? As far as I can see no error has occurred.
>
> The program failed to perform the requested action. That is an error.

Said program must be installed to function as intended.

> I will speak no more on the subject.
>
> I am retreating to someplace where people make sense.

This is the last I speak on it as well. Good luck!

Bob