From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 15 00:28:57 2025 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Feb 2025 05:28:57 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52963 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tjAjZ-0005ML-1D for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 15 Feb 2025 00:28:57 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:52758) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tjAjW-0005Lx-PN for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 15 Feb 2025 00:28:55 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tjAjN-0008Oc-0k for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Feb 2025 00:28:45 -0500 Received: from sofi-shared.hosting.energy ([2001:41d0:602:1f56::] helo=sofi.hosting.energy) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tjAjL-0000ht-DR for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Feb 2025 00:28:44 -0500 Received: from [212.233.84.11] (helo=laptop) by sofi.hosting.energy with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1tjAjC-0004kb-42 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Feb 2025 08:28:34 +0300 From: Evgeny Pisemsky To: bug-guix@gnu.org Subject: Impossible to run both unbound-service-type and knot-service-type Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2025 08:28:31 +0300 Message-ID: <87y0y7dbeo.fsf@pisemsky.site> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: permerror client-ip=2001:41d0:602:1f56::; envelope-from=mail@pisemsky.site; helo=sofi.hosting.energy X-Spam_score_int: -14 X-Spam_score: -1.5 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.399, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) I tried to switch from my homemade unbound service to the recently added to guix; got an error saying that dns service is provided twice, because knot was already on the server, and they both provision dns. But it is technically fine to run them both on different interfaces, where unbound works as a resolver and knot as an authoritative server. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Mar 22 10:06:39 2025 Received: (at 76301) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Mar 2025 14:06:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44447 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tvzUl-0002mp-Ns for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 22 Mar 2025 10:06:39 -0400 Received: from pisemsky.site ([103.54.19.55]:53754) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tvzUj-0002md-En for 76301@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 22 Mar 2025 10:06:38 -0400 Received: from laptop ( [176.59.33.164]) by pisemsky.site (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 27a29741 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO) for <76301@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 22 Mar 2025 14:06:28 +0000 (UTC) From: Evgeny Pisemsky To: 76301@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: Impossible to run both unbound-service-type and knot-service-type Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 17:06:31 +0300 Message-ID: <87ldsxgnx4.fsf@pisemsky.site> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 76301 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) I can't find any services that depend on dns provision, so I suggest to just remove it. Or at least make it configurable, but I think it is generally a bad idea to pollute provisions with such "tags". If some service may depend on different name servers, it should make its requirements configurable. With understandable exceptions for things like networking.