From owner-cvs-lib  Mon Dec 30 12:28:59 1996
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-lib>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id MAA16524
          for cvs-lib-outgoing; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 12:28:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from spinner.DIALix.COM (root@spinner.DIALix.COM [192.203.228.67])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id MAA16518;
          Mon, 30 Dec 1996 12:28:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from spinner.DIALix.COM (peter@localhost.DIALix.oz.au [127.0.0.1])
          by spinner.DIALix.COM (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id EAA25710;
          Tue, 31 Dec 1996 04:28:34 +0800 (WST)
Message-Id: <199612302028.EAA25710@spinner.DIALix.COM>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
cc: joerg@freebsd.org, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org,
        cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-lib@freefall.freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/net res_stubs.c Makefile.inc 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 30 Dec 1996 12:12:29 PST."
             <15655.851976749@time.cdrom.com> 
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 04:28:34 +0800
From: Peter Wemm <peter@spinner.DIALix.COM>
Sender: owner-cvs-lib@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

"Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote:
> > Anyway, the idea was that these files should go into 2.2 after testing in 
> > -current for a day or two...  Perhaps this slip of fingers forced the 
> > issue.  Joerg?  Jordan?  You want these backed out? (I've been using them 
> > in approximately this form for 8 weeks)  Or wait and see if it causes 
> > problems first?
> 
> I'm willing to leave them in there until/unless they cause problems.
> We've still got a few weeks of testing ahead, so better now than later. :)
> 
> 					Jordan

Well, I'm certain (within the limits imposed my Murphy's law) that it 
cannot possibly *cause* problems.  The issue is more one of "Can 2.2 run 
an arbitary resolver-using 3.0 binary, such as sendmail" and vice versa.

If not, we need to find and add the missing aliases before it's shipped.  
The two are call interface compatable.  Casual inspection of the early 
bind-8 resolver looks pretty much the same as the bind-4.9.5-P1 code that 
I just imported into -current, so providing we get this right, John 
Polstra might actually get his wish for a while. :-)

But then, wait till the question of the bind-8 service switch comes up..  
Now _that_ is going to be fun...

Cheers,
-Peter