From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Dec 27 20:50:09 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id UAA13008
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 27 Dec 1995 20:50:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA12995
          for <freebsd-hackers@freefall.freebsd.org>; Wed, 27 Dec 1995 20:50:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id VAA00715; Wed, 27 Dec 1995 21:43:39 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199512280443.VAA00715@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: A Good OS for BIND? (fwd)
To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 21:43:39 -0700 (MST)
Cc: bind-users@vix.com, freebsd-hackers@freefall.freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199512240911.KAA29998@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Dec 24, 95 10:11:12 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

> > > With the SunOS 4.1.X limitations (file descriptors and VM system)
> > > would one of the BSD 4.4 OS's (NetBSD, FreeBSD, BSD/OS) be a better
> > > choice for running BIND?  What other OS's would be a good choice?
> 
> The 4.4BSD's are certainly suitable platforms to run it.  Even old and
> slow machines like a 5Vax 2000 or an i386/16 are known to run all
> versions of BIND fine.

The newer versions of bind have static initialization avoidance.

In English: they won't work with some old code that isn't updated
at the same time you update bind because of some initialization order
assumptions the old code makes.

So if you get the new bind, you need the new sendmail, etc. as well.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.