Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 09:22:24 -0700 From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> To: Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com> Cc: security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bind8.2.3 and installation problem Message-ID: <3A7ED340.68D8BE62@softweyr.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0102022053020.48936-100000@roble.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Roger Marquis wrote:
>
> Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> wrote:
> > > Bind was written on BSD. What's the point of using a port to
> > > upgrade it? All FreeBSD's bind port does is increase your chances
> > > of errors, reduce your system's overall QA, and install duplicate
> > > files in non-standard places.
> >
> > You completely and utterly fail to understand how the ports system works.
> > What FreeBSD's bind port really does is decrease your chance of errors,
> > increase your systems's overall QA, install all of the bind configuration
> > and executable files in standard FreeBSD locations, track which files
> > were installed and allow you to deinstall them simply, and provide a
> > one-stop upgrade path.
>
> Wes, I believe you "utterly fail to understand" the level of quality
> assurance in FreeBSD's ports collection.
I understand it completely, having provided a few of them myself. There
is no implied "audit" of ports, most of them are simply the attempt of
the port maintainer to make the program compile and install easily under
FreeBSD.
> Certainly ports are vastly
> better than Linux rpms but they have more than enough bugs to render
> such blind faith ill-advised.
>
> Install bind first via ports and then via the bind-supplied Makefile.
> You may find, as I did, that the port _increases_ your chances of
No.
> errors and _does_not_ install files in their original locations.
Correct, it installs them in *FreeBSD standard* locations. I fail to
see how this increases the chance of errors.
> The only feature this particular port adds, when it works, is a
> log under /var/db/pkg that's easier to parse than `make -n`.
>
> I've been big fan of ports since 2.0.5. They are, IMHO, FreeBSD's
> best feature. However, that does not mean they should be trusted
> like a Windows setup.exe.
Oh, yeah, because windows setup.exe files never have bugs or virus
attached, right? You have perverse idea of security.
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3A7ED340.68D8BE62>