From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 22 17:07:31 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77FC61065672 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:07:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx21.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 086D68FC16 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:07:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 8317 invoked by uid 399); 22 Sep 2009 17:07:26 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO foreign.dougb.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 22 Sep 2009 17:07:26 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4AB90448.9020706@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:07:20 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090822) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sergey Vinogradov References: <20090921112657.GW95398@hoeg.nl> <20090922135435.36a3d40e@lazybytes.org> In-Reply-To: <20090922135435.36a3d40e@lazybytes.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 OpenPGP: id=D5B2F0FB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: BIND in the base (Was: Re: tmux(1) in base) X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:07:31 -0000 Sergey Vinogradov wrote: > The things in the base system I always wondered about are sendmail > and bind9. These are pretty heavy, and definitely are not used in every > single installation. Maybe someday I'll see sendmail and bind9 in ports > instead of base system. And yes, I know about WITHOUT_BIND= and > WITHOUT_SENDMAIL= :) For about the millionth time ... :) I would be perfectly happy to remove BIND, however most people want some or all of dig, host, or nslookup in the base, which means that about 60% or more of the BIND source code has to be there to allow that. From there it's a pretty simple leap to "let's build it all then because that's how we've always done it." The next-best thing would be to flip the knobs so that we're not building named and friends by default which I'm happy to do if people want it done, but no one ever comes up with a clear consensus to do it. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection