Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 21:16:55 +0000 From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pull in upstream before 9.1 code freeze? Message-ID: <89AB703D-E075-4AAC-AC1B-B358CC4E4E7F@lists.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <86bojxow6x.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <CA%2BQLa9B-Dm-=hQCrbEgyfO4sKZ5aG72_PEFF9nLhyoy4GRCGrA@mail.gmail.com> <4FF2E00E.2030502@FreeBSD.org> <86bojxow6x.fsf@ds4.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3. Jul 2012, at 12:39 , Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> writes: >> The correct solution to this problem is to remove BIND from the base >> altogether, but I have no energy for all the whinging that would = happen >> if I tried (again) to do that. >=20 > I don't think there will be as much whinging as you expect. Times = have > changed. >=20 > I'm willing to import and maintain unbound (BSD-licensed validating, > recursive, and caching DNS resolver) if you remove BIND. I'd object to it. Trading one for another without gaining anything does not help us much. Don't get me wrong I have both running for years and even maintain = patches for unbound for 2 years now for functionality they do not provide, which named happily gives me. If you want to do this, I would prefer a properly laid out action plan as the import is by far the easiest but the integration into various parts of the system is harder. /bz --=20 Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions! It does not matter how good you are. It matters what good you do!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?89AB703D-E075-4AAC-AC1B-B358CC4E4E7F>