From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 17 15:10:38 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 4A87716A4CE; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:10:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C96D743D39; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:10:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior-wifi.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j2HFAKHK032004; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 08:10:20 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <42399D58.3040000@samsco.org> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 08:08:08 -0700 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050218 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin References: <42380A1D.1010005@freebsd.org> <200503161749.24588.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200503161749.24588.jhb@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org cc: Doug Barton cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org 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: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:10:38 -0000 John Baldwin wrote: > 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. > I agree here, though maybe the argument is moot now that Doug imported 9.3.1 last night? Not changing the status quo is ok too. Scott