You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When you cargo run as root or make test-integration, it creates root owned files in ./target. Then you need to be root anytime you do anything with cargo after that, or at least delete .cargo-lock
I think it needs root to
read the system's authtoken.secret
there's already a flag for specifying this file, so this might be already work around able
there's also a standard user location for a copy of authtoken.secret to exist. maybe i'll make it search there too.
bind to port 53
on macos, it just lets you bind 53 as a user. on linux, you could modify your system to allow it. but maybe the port should configurable.
I don't know enough about dns to know if this type of dns server ever wants to be bound to a non 53 port. Probably only if it's getting queried by another server, not by the end user/os.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Just a nice to have type of thing.
When you
cargo run
as root ormake test-integration
, it creates root owned files in./target
. Then you need to be root anytime you do anything with cargo after that, or at least delete .cargo-lockI think it needs root to
there's already a flag for specifying this file, so this might be already work around able
there's also a standard user location for a copy of authtoken.secret to exist. maybe i'll make it search there too.
on macos, it just lets you bind 53 as a user. on linux, you could modify your system to allow it. but maybe the port should configurable.
I don't know enough about dns to know if this type of dns server ever wants to be bound to a non 53 port. Probably only if it's getting queried by another server, not by the end user/os.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: