Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2015 17:23:25 +0000 From: Loganaden Velvindron <loganaden@gmail.com> To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> Cc: The BSD Dreamer <beastie@tardisi.com>, dougb@dougbarton.us, FreeBSD ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: BIND REPLACE_BASE option Message-ID: <CAOp4FwSGQLOeBXT6Umqm05otxXetEKyL4Rx_njMeq1Kv7TYuwQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201501111714.t0BHDwvA094684@fire.js.berklix.net> References: <ee422bd630292fe6f7bc5439799667de@lhaven.homeip.net> <201501111714.t0BHDwvA094684@fire.js.berklix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Julian H. Stacey <jhs@berklix.com> wrote: > Hi, Reference: >> From: The BSD Dreamer <beastie@tardisi.com> >> Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 21:25:11 -0600 > > The BSD Dreamer wrote: >> >> On 2015-01-09 07:42, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >> > +--On 8 janvier 2015 19:44:09 -0800 Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> wrote: >> > | Can you please explain why this option was removed? It's been in the >> > | ports for over 13 years, and lots of users utilized it. >> > | >> > | I realize that BIND is no longer in the base in 10.x, but that would >> > | be a reason to make the option conditional, to continue to support the >> > | substantial user base that is still on 8.x and 9.x. >> > >> > I only removed it from bind99, it was never there in bind910. I removed it >> > because it was a poor design idea to begin with, and it was making the port >> > harder to maintain. Also, it was overwriting files in the base system, >> > which is a thing we do not want to do. >> > >> > All you need to do is add: >> > >> > named_program="/usr/local/sbin/named" >> > >> > to your rc.conf, like the message says when you install the port. >> > >> > It was a bit like the /usr/bin/perl symlink, it was time for it to go. >> >> But, it was a huge and sudden pain for it to suddenly disappear and break >> everything... >> >> I can only abandon FreeBSD as our DNS platform as fast as replacement systems >> appear. >> >> Why have we decided that we're going to cease FreeBSD for our DNS servers >> (after I had made such a strong case for FreeBSD?) Count the PORTREVISIONs >> to bind before 9.9.4 and after. Plus look at all the other annoying changes >> in those PORTREVISIONs without that things have been working fine for the >> rest of us before. >> >> I should've been home hours ago...if I haven't been stuck dealing with >> bizarre problems caused by updating a bunch of packages. >> >> Now I have update nagios-plugins, since base nslookup is gone. Does it end? > > > ( ... As another user/admin of named for years, I've also gnashed teeth > as FreeBSD re-arranged var & chroot & rndc paths yet again, per > version; Needing more version dependent additions to my multi > version wrapper shell. OK, perhaps inevitable, but ... ) > > The latest FreeBSD named annoyance, ripping named out of src/ (& > apparently abandoning the chroot too I've read ?!), caused me & Is there a rationale behind abandoing chroot() ? Is there a URL for that ? > presumably numerous other user admins to _Not_ upgrade FreeBSD boxes > until extra free time could be found to deal with FreeBSD gratuitously > consuming user time. > > Years back FreeBSD had too many broken ports, but at least then > broken code was still in ports/ even if not enough was marked with > Makefile BROKEN="cause", & often we needed numerous setenv DUDS > "onemore `printenv DUDS`" . > > Now FreeBSD ports is in some ways Worse, it regularly loses not > just broken but even working ports, for no Good reason (eg demime > & majordomo etc). > > Ports get regularly axed, so user admins know for each FreeBSD > upgrade we've first got to stumble over what ports commiters have > axed, then discover when axed, then recover back from svn to ports/, > then install marked BROKEN=, then develop a fix (if a fix is even > necessary!), then store the patch for automatic application by local > script, (in case FreeBSD fail to accept it ) then convince FreeBSD > that a butchered port thould be restored. > > FreeBSD ports axe men are damaging FreeBSD, they should just > assert BROKEN= on broken ports, & Never removing working ports/ ! > > Cheers, > Julian > -- > Julian Stacey, BSD Linux Unix C Sys Eng Consultant Munich http://berklix.com > Indent previous with "> ". Interleave reply paragraphs like a play script. > Send plain text, not quoted-printable, HTML, base64, or multipart/alternative. > Practice French & support democracy ? Buy on 14 Jan http://www.charliehebdo.fr > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- This message is strictly personal and the opinions expressed do not represent those of my employers, either past or present.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOp4FwSGQLOeBXT6Umqm05otxXetEKyL4Rx_njMeq1Kv7TYuwQ>