Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 22:41:11 -0700 From: "Crist J. Clark" <cristjc@comcast.net> To: Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des@des.no> Cc: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Proper way to run bind9 Message-ID: <20040928054111.GB3706@blossom.cjclark.org> In-Reply-To: <xzpvfdz7ymu.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <1096042856.24267.6.camel@purgatory.ceribus.net> <xzpsm97v49e.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040924222550.F6548@URF.trarfvf> <1096064849.1047.7.camel@server.mcneil.com> <20040925001835.U7126@URF.trarfvf> <b34be84204092718334b4b77af@mail.gmail.com> <20040927184543.I911@bo.vpnaa.bet> <xzpvfdz7ymu.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<bikeshed_alert>
Has the crew importing BIND 9 considered whether this may be
a chance to move FreeBSD's default home for zone files out
of /etc/namedb? Leaving named.conf under /etc is perfectly
fine, but I've always found something... unsavory about having
slave and dynamic zone files living under /etc. That is, I,
and I know some others as well, find the idea of having daemon
processes writing files in /etc suboptimal. It also messes
with that dream of a FreeBSD where / and /usr (if they are
not on one partition anyway) can easily be mounted read-only
without breaking stuff.
Yes, of course, the purists can configure the BIND root to
be anywhere, but defaulting to /etc still seems like a bad
way to start off those who do not know any better. Perhaps
this is an opportunity to move to a /var/named or something
like that?
</bikeshed_alert>
--
Crist J. Clark | cjclark@alum.mit.edu
| cjclark@jhu.edu
http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/ | cjc@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040928054111.GB3706>