From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 6 13:40:42 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E136641 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 13:40:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ultra-secure.de (mail.ultra-secure.de [78.47.114.122]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 411A01DB0 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 13:40:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 82877 invoked by uid 89); 6 Dec 2013 13:39:45 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.4.0 ppid: 82872, pid: 82874, t: 0.0660s scanners: attach: 1.4.0 clamav: 0.97.3/m:55/d:18205 Received: from unknown (HELO suse3) (rainer@ultra-secure.de@212.71.117.1) by mail.ultra-secure.de with ESMTPA; 6 Dec 2013 13:39:45 -0000 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 14:39:44 +0100 From: Rainer Duffner To: Torfinn Ingolfsen Subject: Re: BIND chroot environment in 10-RELEASE...gone? Message-ID: <20131206143944.4873391d@suse3> In-Reply-To: <20131205193815.05de3829de9e33197fe210ac@getmail.no> References: <529D9CC5.8060709@rancid.berkeley.edu> <20131204095855.GY29825@droso.dk> <20131205193815.05de3829de9e33197fe210ac@getmail.no> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 13:40:42 -0000 > 2) that this mess around FreeBSD 10 will not slow the > adoption rate of FreeBSD 10. I don't think so. Only a fraction of my servers ever needed BIND. And where we need it, we're happy to install a port of it (which has a lot of OPTIONS, which I saw for the first time only recently...) I can see the point for somebody who is running dozens of BIND-servers, though. Tracking BIND-updates via freebsd-update was/is probably quite convenient. But, I have to say: if you do a major version upgrade, don't read the release-notes (which will mention the absence of BIND, I assume) and don't do a test-run of the upgrade on a non-critical-system, maybe you shouldn't be running a nameserver at all in the first place. And BIND even less so, IMHO.