From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 4 21:43:28 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC47516A4CE; Mon, 4 Oct 2004 21:43:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp2.jazztel.es (smtp2.jazztel.es [62.14.3.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E2B43D1F; Mon, 4 Oct 2004 21:43:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es) Received: from antivirus by smtp2.jazztel.es with antivirus id 1CEac7-00086F-00 Mon, 04 Oct 2004 23:43:23 +0200 Received: from [212.106.236.104] (helo=rguez.homeunix.net) by smtp2.jazztel.es with esmtp id 1CEac6-00085L-00 Mon, 04 Oct 2004 23:43:22 +0200 Received: from redesjm.local (orion.redesjm.local [192.168.254.16]) by rguez.homeunix.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id i94LhPYL012672; Mon, 4 Oct 2004 23:43:25 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@redesjm.local) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by redesjm.local (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id i94LhLSr073974; Mon, 4 Oct 2004 23:43:21 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@redesjm.local) From: Jose M Rodriguez To: Doug Barton Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 23:43:17 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 References: <4160259A.3070708@FreeBSD.org> <200410041734.53316.freebsd@redesjm.local> <20041004125738.K778@bo.vpnaa.bet> In-Reply-To: <20041004125738.K778@bo.vpnaa.bet> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200410042343.19211.freebsd@redesjm.local> X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir Milter 1.1-beta; AVE 6.27.0.12; VDF 6.27.0.81 (host: antares.redesjm.local) X-Virus-Scanned: by antivirus cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: Jose M Rodriguez Subject: Re: New BIND 9 chroot directories X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 21:43:29 -0000 El Lunes, 4 de Octubre de 2004 22:10, Doug Barton escribi=F3: > On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, Jose M Rodriguez wrote: > > At last here, BETA7 come with a populated /var/named. > > Yes, this is as it should be. > > > we've used /var/named for ages without this layout. > > OK. > > > Is this really needed? > > It is necessary to have a default chroot directory structure, yes. > You can easily prevent /etc/rc.d/named from doing anything with it by > adding named_chroot_autoupdate=3D"NO" to your /etc/rc.conf[.local] > file. You can also prevent mergemaster from tempting you with files > in /etc/namedb by adding NO_BIND_ETC to /etc/make.conf. What may be > necessary at this point is to add a knob that prevents the directory > structure from being created in the installworld step. I'll look at > that tonight. > Really good work. But, this is really needed? I can't see why. We can go release with a default: named_chrootdir=3D"" named_flags=3D"-u bind" named_enable=3D"NO" And with your strong support for chrooted operation in /etc/rc.d/named So any sysadmin have time/freedoom for setup the chroot before launch=20 named. The default setup seems enough for a firsttimer/home user. I'll prefer=20 a /etc/named/named.conf default that only listen on localhost. Even I see easier tweak /etc/rc.d/named to populate a wide=20 ${named_chrootdir} from defaults and /etc/namedb. I'm really sorry about that, but I think that the status at fresh BETA6=20 is far better than now. > I feel that I've provided the users plenty of knobs to customize this > stuff with, but if folks have ideas on how it can be improved, I'm > open to them. > Yes, this is not the way. I think you allready go too far on this. > > This breaks our update plans. > > Well, hopefully I've demonstrated that the problems you've > experienced can be worked around. Of course, two other options are > available, one is to move your stuff to a different directory, and > the other is to adopt the structure that is now being installed by > default. > > > Also, I think this is not well documnted on UPDATING > > The entry in UPDATING says (in part): > > If you are using a custom configuration, or if you have > customised the named_* variables in /etc/rc.conf[.local] > then you may have to adjust the instructions accordingly. > It is suggested that you carefully examine the new named > variables in /etc/defaults/rc.conf and the options in > /var/named/etc/namedb/named.conf to see if they might > now be more suitable. > > If you have suggestions on how this can be made more clear, please > let me know. > > Doug If we go release rigth now, you must describe directly the chroot setup=20 and not as an option. An explicit reference to /var/named (filled from tarballs) must exist in=20 release notes. =2D- josemi