From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 9 06:26:09 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [69.147.83.53]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB0501065673 for ; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 06:26:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from opti.dougb.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15451151096; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 06:26:08 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4FFA7980.4000707@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:26:08 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD i386; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120624 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Avleen Vig References: <4FF2E00E.2030502@FreeBSD.org> <86bojxow6x.fsf@ds4.des.no> <89AB703D-E075-4AAC-AC1B-B358CC4E4E7F@lists.zabbadoz.net> <4FF8C3A1.9080805@FreeBSD.org> <20472.51031.308284.775990@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <4FF8C890.9030408@FreeBSD.org> <4FFA7174.7050604@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling?=, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_Sm=F8rgrav?= , Garrett Wollman , FreeBSD Hackers Subject: Re: Replacing BIND with unbound (Was: Re: Pull in upstream before 9.1 code freeze?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 06:26:10 -0000 On 07/08/2012 23:16, Avleen Vig wrote: > On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Doug Barton wrote: >> On 07/08/2012 22:43, Avleen Vig wrote: >>> It would be silly not to keep bind-tools in base. >> >> Sounds easy, but not so much in practice. Keeping any of the code >> doesn't solve the problem of the release cycles not syncing up. And for >> the vast majority of users needs the tools we will import will be more >> than adequate. > > The question I keep asking myself is: > "Is this best for the users?" Carrying BIND code in the base that is past EOL is not good for the users, period. Everything else we're discussing is an implementation detail. > Linux has `nscd` which is a nice caching resolver, but most > distributions still carry bind-tools in the default install. A) You're wrong about "most." and B) The Linux distros have a default set of packages. There is no "base" like there is in FreeBSD. (Thus, your analogy is flawed.) That said, I still believe that our idea of what should, and should not be, in the base system is seriously flawed, and needs to be completely redone. But that's never going to happen, so I'm trying to work with what we've got. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection