Subject: Re: change in bind?
To: NetBSD Networking Technical Discussion List <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/17/2000 03:25:38
[ On Friday, November 17, 2000 at 03:07:44 (-0500), Andrew Brown wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: change in bind?
> but it's also lacking others that previous
> releases of bind *do* have.
please name them -- I haven't run across any yet and the release notes
don't mention any either (except for one apparently cross-platform bug
that's pretty minor)
> grep zxfr? i dunno.
If you'd seen the proposed patches (which did actually fix the problem),
and the very different fixes released in 8.2.2-P7, I don't think you'd
be so happy about any of the 8.2.x code....
> i've been running 8.2.3 betas for a long time now.
and you call the v9 code less stable? that's hilarious! even I haven't
tried running the 8.2.3 betas in production yet! :-)
> last time i checked, that wasn't part of the base netbsd distribution,
> so i don't think any threaded apps will become part of the base
> distribution first.
true enough, but something has to push the envelope.... as much as I
dislike threads in user-land code, BINDv9 seems to have made very good
use of them
> let's see...i can't build my name server because it requires a threads
> package that i can't download and install because i need a name server
> to get to the ftp site. catch 22.
That's totally bogus.
First off NetBSD comes with a functional resolver (that you won't be
replacing anyway) that'll get you past the hurdle, even if you have to
point it at a cache server half way around the world to do so.
Secondly you can do your package builds on a separate development
machine (i.e. one that's already functioning autonomously) and test them
before even installing them on the target system where they'll be used.
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <email@example.com> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Secrets of the Weird <email@example.com>