Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 15:27:16 +0100 From: Paul Schenkeveld <fb-stable@psconsult.nl> To: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <jruigrok@via-net-works.nl> Cc: Bill Moran <wmoran@mail.iowna.com>, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Additional BIND ???s (was Re: Problems with BIND in 4.2-STABLE (resource leak?)) Message-ID: <20010128152716.A51576@psconsult.nl> In-Reply-To: <20010127191958.D51681@lucifer.bart.nl>; from jruigrok@via-net-works.nl on Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 07:19:58PM %2B0100 References: <3A72474D.979B84FA@mail.iowna.com> <20010127100200.B51681@lucifer.bart.nl> <3A72E375.C71C175F@mail.iowna.com> <20010127191958.D51681@lucifer.bart.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
Yesterday I did a quick port of 8.2.3 after reading the email from
Paul Vixie.
I started with the 8.2.2P7 port had had to change the distinfo (put
in the MD5 checksums from Paul Vixies email) and patch-ac (it turned
out that all the patch files in 8.2.2P7 did was adapting the Makefiles
to the FreeBSD ports system).
Here's the new patch-ac (strip the | in front):
|--- src/bin/Makefile.old Sat Dec 23 09:02:48 2000
|+++ src/bin/Makefile Sat Jan 27 16:32:30 2001
|@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@
| "VER=${VER}" "STRIP=${STRIP}" "PS=${PS}" "INSTALL_LIB=${INSTALL_LIB}" \
| "INSTALL_EXEC=${INSTALL_EXEC}" "BOUNDS=${BOUNDS}"
|
|-CFLAGS= ${CDEBUG}
|+CFLAGS=
| CPPFLAGS= -I${PORTINCL} -I${INCL}
|
| SUBDIRS = addr nslookup dig dnsquery host named named-xfer ndc nsupdate \
Cheers!
Paul Schenkeveld, Consultant
PSconsult ICT Services BV
On Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 07:19:58PM +0100, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> -On [20010127 16:10], Bill Moran (wmoran@mail.iowna.com) wrote:
> >Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> >>
> >> [snip RAM problem]
> >>
> >> >Has anyone else seen this, or have I got some unique problem here?
> >>
> >> There were a fair amount of bugs in 8.2.3 betas.
> >>
> >> I am in the progress of preparing the import, and importing 8.2.3, which
> >> is the released version. As soon as I have it imported in CURRENT, and
> >> after I have done my usual round of testing in STABLE I will MFC it.
> >
> >In a nutshell then, you're telling me:
> >a) problems like this have been seen before
>
> No, where did I say that? I merely said that there are a few bugs in
> BIND TxB. But BIND 8.2.2-pX have problems as well.
>
> I just read over the CHANGES and there have been fixed a number of
> memory leaks. So you might be tripping over these.
>
> >b) the solution is to use a different version of BIND
>
> Possibly.
>
> >That brings me to one other question:
> >In reviewing the list archives I noticed some early complaints about
> >beta code being used in -STABLE. The response to this was (if I
> >understood it correctly) that the 8.2.3 beta code was better than the
> >8.2.2 stable code.
>
> 8.2.2 has had problems as well. And the MFC was done in the prospect
> that the beta period would not take over 6 months.
>
> >The ultimate reason for this question is simple: Should I switch to bind
> >8.2.2 or wait for the latest MFC? Is 8.2.2 going to increase the
> >reliability of this machine or am I better off dealing with 8.2.3 for
> >now? This is a production machine and I'd like to get it to as stable a
> >point as possible and quit messing with it.
>
> 8.2.3 hasn't had problems with regard to security as 8.2.2 has/had.
>
> --
> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven VIA Net.Works The Netherlands
> BSD: Technical excellence at its best Network- and systemadministrator
> D78D D0AD 244D 1D12 C9CA 7152 035C 1138 546A B867
> Misery loves company...
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010128152716.A51576>