Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 03 Dec 2013 22:36:12 +0100 (CET)
From:      sthaug@nethelp.no
To:        gcr+freebsd-stable@tharned.org
Cc:        rkoberman@gmail.com, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: BIND chroot environment in 10-RELEASE...gone?
Message-ID:  <20131203.223612.74719903.sthaug@nethelp.no>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1312031407090.78399@roadkill.tharned.org>
References:  <1386086749.9599.54995173.6CD35E54@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAN6yY1sVGiQFNkoi0mGZs7grJ5SMAui-rDO1e8UDAs0PTUVL9g@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1312031407090.78399@roadkill.tharned.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > It was a deliberate decision made by the maintainer. He said the chroot 
> > code in the installation was too complicated and would be removed as a 
> > part of the installation clean-up to get all BIND related files out of 
> > /usr and /etc. I protested at the time as did someone else, but the 
> > maintainer did not respond. I thnk this was a really, really bad 
> > decision.
> >
> > I searched a bit for the thread on removing BIND leftovers, but have 
> > failed to find it.
> >
> 
> You're probably thinking about my November 17 posting: 
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2013-November/075895.html
> 
> I'm glad to see others finally speaking up; I was beginning to think I was 
> the only one who thought this was not a good idea.  I'm a bit surprised 
> that no one has responded yet.

I agree with the protesters here. Removing chroot and symlinking logic
in the ports is a significant disservice to FreeBSD users, and will 
make it harder to use BIND in a sensible way. A net disincentive to
use FreeBSD :-(

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131203.223612.74719903.sthaug>