OS X DNS cache reset script
github.com
github.com
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/01/why-dns-in-os-x-10-10-i...
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/05/new-os-x-beta-dumps-dis...
sudo ifconfig awdl0 downThey just put it out there, which is more than other people did.
If someone feels it needs an added explanation, they can add it themselves.
Some, who had faced similar issue at some time or another, will understand immediately what this is, anyway.
That's not a positive feeling. Especially if you're with a client and your browser stops resolving and your client is watching you open up terminal to spin mDNSResponder
So I see absolutely no point here.
dscacheutil -q host -a name www.example.com
On the topic, easiest way to see if dscacheutil -flushcache work or not is to probably do something like: dscacheutil -q host -a name www.example.com
# Make sure it's in the cache prior to running.
sudo dscacheutil -flushcache
dscacheutil -q host -a name www.example.com
# Notice if there's a slight delay for the lookup.
sudo killall -HUP mDNSResponder
dscacheutil -q host -a name www.example.com
# Notice if there's a slight delay for the lookup.* Snow Leopard and earlier use lookupd for DNS resolving (`dscacheutil -flushcache`)
* Since Lion, they switched from lookupd to mDNSResponder, presumably for Bonjour protocol support (`killall -HUP mDNSResponder`)
* Yosemite switched to discoveryd that basically is a rewrite of mDNSResponder (`discoveryutil mdnsflushcache`)
* Due to a lot of problems with discoveryd, they switched from discoveryd back to mDNSResponder since v10.10.4 (so we're back to `killall HUP mDNSResponder`)
It gets more annoying if you want to explain it to a non-technical OS X user. Maybe this little repo will help them converge on a command alias for the future
Having a simple command such as "reset dnscache" or something of course would be nice, but since it can already be done in a matter of seconds with a quick google I can't imagine it's that much of concern for apple of many developers compared to other issues.
dscacheutil -flushcache || \
discoveryutil mdnsflushcache || \
killall -HUP mDNSResponderNothing bad could possibly happen. [1]
Install with
curl http://issh.it/yadummy | sh
It all comes downs to whether you trust the source.
At least with the "curl http://xxx | sh" method you can also examine the contents of the script before running it, and even opt to run it after downloading it and checking it locally.
With binary apps off of internet sites, which is what people install and use dozens of times a month, no such luck.
All you said are true for binary blobs as well. The page could be MITM, etc.
"curl xxx | sh" style deployment has all the same disadvantages of binary blogs, but has the added advantage that you can download and check the code before executing it.
In short, `curl https://www.example.org/foo.sh` and `curl https://www.example.org/foo.sh | sh` can do different things :(
I can't recall the last time I had a positive cache entry issue, but the last time the dropped DNS lookup for www.google.com happened to me was like 2 days ago...
sudo discoveryutil udnsflushcaches set -eu
set -o pipefail
to avoid the default ON ERROR RESUME NEXT behaviour of bash.Besides he is right, and those are useful additions to almost any script that you want to stop on error, undefined vars, etc.
Why is changing names seen as a negative thing? My company also changed its name a month ago, and several customers leaving negative feedback said included this phrase or something similar, while to my recollection none of the positive feedback (which we have way more of) took mention of the name change.
basically, it's a no-feature change, so an unnecessary one, so a "bad" one.
And what's the point? MacOS X was a decent name, with good recognition and trust. If people were interested in understanding the back story to the name, they could, but the 'X' didn't scream '10' to people who weren't familiar with the history, so there wasn't a ton of confusion.
Branding changes product names all the time. MacOS X was nonsensical. I'm glad they changed it.
It is, however, used as a negative thing by people who would vent regardless of the name change, and just want to emphasize they care so little about you that they can't even remember your name("or whatever you're called"). It's just some classic disgruntled customer stuff.
echo "¯\_(ツ)_/¯"
Something about seeing the shrug emoji in code just cracks me up every time.> There is also the \(°O°)\, indicating a hooligan or crazed behaviour, and the (ノ◕ヮ◕)ノ*:・゚.
Of course, one could argue that since the word is now being used internationally, it's not necessary for them to be interpret in the same way as its roots.
Emoticons predate Unicode and emoji, but were later adapted to include Unicode characters.
Multi-character ones would be called smileys, emotes, or emoticons. The confusion comes from the fact that many messengers will automatically replace multi-character emotes with an emoji.
Emoji is a Japanese loan word 絵文字 (literally picture character), you can read more about them:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emoji
Emoji in English can used as a singular or plural word but you can also write emojis.
Emoticons are then usually made up out of multiple ASCII-symbols, although general Unicode is by now also in use: :), :-), :|, :[ ...
And then for the "ㄟ(ツ)ㄏ"-Emoticon, you can get more specific about it and call it "Kaomoji". Kaomoji are not Emoji, even though the two sound related, and are actually a more horizontal style of Emoticons, so basically any Emoticon which you can read without turning your head: ㄟ(ツ)ㄏ, ^^, (っ´▽`)っ, (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻, ఠ_ఠ ...
No, it isn't the profanity we care about, but the baitiness. Titles that stir up drama or controversy aren't a good fit for HN—the discussions are inevitably primed by the titles, and those are the kind of discussions we hope to avoid.