From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 22 18:41:07 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C11B71065670 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 18:41:07 +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 4E3D88FC29 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 18:41:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 25202 invoked by uid 399); 22 Sep 2010 18:41:06 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.142?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 22 Sep 2010 18:41:06 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4C9A4DC3.60001@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:41:07 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin References: <4C98F433.6070506@FreeBSD.org> <20100921193101.GA95238@night.db.net> <20100922095724.C31898@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <201009220950.32294.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201009220950.32294.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2a1pre OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BIND9 built w/--disable-ipv6 on 8.1-STABLE X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 18:41:07 -0000 On 9/22/2010 6:50 AM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday, September 22, 2010 6:02:08 am Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: >> Can't we just do what lib/bind/config.mk already does? Since I've already answered this twice in the same thread, I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine why I will not be making your proposed change. > Actually, I frequently build custom kernels w/o INET6, but don't necessarily > disable INET6 for the world build. However, why can't BIND just be fixed to > have sane behavior if the kernel doesn't support INET6? It already behaves as you expect it should, which I've already explained in detail twice in this same thread. These are not the droids you're looking for, move along. Doug -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/