From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 16 22:48:23 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66E2D16A4E0 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:48:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail21.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail21.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.23]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E810143D2F for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:48:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 8278 invoked from network); 16 Mar 2005 22:48:22 -0000 Received: from server.baldwin.cx ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender )AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 16 Mar 2005 22:48:21 -0000 Received: from [10.50.40.202] (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j2GMm5Kv002222; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:48:16 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:49:24 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <42380A1D.1010005@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <42380A1D.1010005@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200503161749.24588.jhb@FreeBSD.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.8 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on server.baldwin.cx cc: Doug Barton Subject: Re: Time to stop buildling named (and friends) by default in 6-current? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:48:23 -0000 On Wednesday 16 March 2005 05:27 am, Doug Barton wrote: > Folks, > > Way back at the bsdcon in Foster City when we first started talking about > importing BIND 9 into the base we also talked about adding more knobs to > give users finer grained control over which bits of BIND were built, and > turning off the build of named (and associated binaries) by default. Well, > the first bit is done, so we're now in the position of being able to flip > the NO_BIND_NAMED knob (see make.conf(5) for details) to WITH_BIND_NAMED, > and turn it off by default. Is this something that we're still interested > in doing? If so, this would be a good time to do it, since I'll be > importing 9.3.1 sometime in the next couple days (first round of make world > testing is underway), and we're still early in the life of 6-current. > > Of course, this would only be for 6-current, we wouldn't change the > behavior in RELENG_[45]. > > What do you think? If we are going to do this, then why not just have users install bind from ports and only install the client as part of the base system? This is what we do with DHCP for example. Basically, if it's going to be an optional component, I think it belongs in ports, not the /usr/src. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org