From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 7 00:39:16 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BB26168 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2013 00:39:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-f53.google.com (mail-qa0-f53.google.com [209.85.216.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0393811AA for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2013 00:39:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id j5so1067921qaq.5 for ; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 16:39:09 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=uOKv6k7puWxX0Xhv1MHDNCkvV/W00K9U0eBbXKAjE5o=; b=TTz97d0c0qbunPNjDEst+f0OyCll4RWykvGPkxS+BFyPqSlwQ2N0SJB04RYV1uFdkP bPwOeNlzDB7D6muOegwVlIgsw9tQDAMU1uG94vejC3dxVaLpLUzpWddr6jsibLmPR36d FtnM1+YBKZtgtTK8jiCts6CLVYah9zgxuRen2tWlhkStbZv9R6LBAMLnLgGApc9s0+su lnh2QCzfxWAcf45+KvbEwUoL1OKOxNLVyHzmUg5HL8Zk4HTV2kP0ffYhmqIDsG956MHg z8w7VB95O9QpH8k0R2qJRD18FoUNsfREz41/nizuQkN6GR0uw+UdJGZ70SZIrxSCeho7 eumw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnAVJQ6VfmR/1/priN86xoqAVtElYQrFJ23jMNtnD17YntHxztMJhvJ816o5M9s5OTLuU1g X-Received: by 10.49.86.199 with SMTP id r7mr11456448qez.23.1386376307699; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 16:31:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.4] (pool-72-84-124-111.nrflva.fios.verizon.net. [72.84.124.111]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id j4sm1234604qan.4.2013.12.06.16.31.46 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 06 Dec 2013 16:31:46 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52A26C71.4080308@ohlste.in> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 19:31:45 -0500 From: Jim Ohlstein User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rainer Duffner Subject: Re: BIND chroot environment in 10-RELEASE...gone? References: <529D9CC5.8060709@rancid.berkeley.edu> <20131204095855.GY29825@droso.dk> <20131205193815.05de3829de9e33197fe210ac@getmail.no> <20131206143944.4873391d@suse3> In-Reply-To: <20131206143944.4873391d@suse3> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2013 00:39:16 -0000 On 12/6/13, 8:39 AM, Rainer Duffner wrote: > > >> 2) that this mess around FreeBSD 10 will not slow the >> adoption rate of FreeBSD 10. > > > I don't think so. > Only a fraction of my servers ever needed BIND. > And where we need it, we're happy to install a port of it (which has a > lot of OPTIONS, which I saw for the first time only recently...) I disagree. I only run BIND on a few servers. None are exclusively nameservers. The hassle involved in properly setting up the chroot(8) would be a definite negative for me if I were considering a switch from GNU/Linux where most distros set it up that way "out of the box". That would be a definite "con" on my list of "pros and cons" especially if I read this thread. -- Jim Ohlstein