Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 19:49:03 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BIND build knobs Message-ID: <20040926024903.GB2530@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20040924210405.A6066@URF.trarfvf> References: <200409241342.i8ODg06a030839@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040924164730.GA4259@xor.obsecurity.org> <41545194.1030700@DougBarton.net> <Pine.BSF.4.53.0409241811490.93902@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net> <20040924210405.A6066@URF.trarfvf>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 09:33:22PM +0100, Doug Barton wrote:
> The goal here is to make the NO_BIND option a lot more granular, and to
> default some of the options to not install bits unless they are
> specifically requested. The knob for the libs is the first step in the
> latter direction.
>
> The other knobs I have in mind are as follows:
>
> #NO_BIND_DNSSEC= true # dnssec-{keygen|signzone}
> #NO_BIND_LWRESD= true # lwresd
> #NO_BIND_NAMED= true # named, named-check{conf|zone},
> rndc[-confgen]
> #NO_BIND_UTILS= true # dig, host, nslookup, nsupdate
I assume "NO_BIND" will still imply all the above?
--
-- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040926024903.GB2530>