From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 10 00:06:49 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E03A1065672 for ; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 00:06:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx21.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1EC18FC0C for ; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 00:06:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 17380 invoked by uid 399); 10 Apr 2010 00:06:47 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.145?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 10 Apr 2010 00:06:47 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:06:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton To: Eir Nym In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) X-message-flag: Outlook -- Not just for spreading viruses anymore! X-OpenPGP-Key-ID: 0xD5B2F0FB Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BIND from system and from ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 00:06:49 -0000 On Wed, 7 Apr 2010, Eir Nym wrote: > All is good in BIND in system, except it depends on ports tree with > various options. > I have to do followed algorithm, to enable these options: > 1) make and install base system > 2) install needed dependencies from ports tree There is another step here, enable optional dependencies that are not enabled by default. > 3) rebuild and reinstall world > > This is more complex than: > 1) make and install base system > 2) install same(?) BIND from ports tree with same options So do that. :) Nothing requires you to use the optional mechanism in the base. > Why does base system has any dependencies from ports? > I know about application features, but special cases aren't special > enough to break the rules, isn't it? You haven't actually expressed a problem here. Can you enumerate any actual concerns you have, and what the implications of them are? FWIW, I added the options that exist now in response to user demand. People wanted to be able to use BIND in the base with those options enabled. hth, Doug -- Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/ Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso