On Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 04:25:36PM +0200, Christian Kurz wrote: > No, please reread my previous mails: I claim that people will abandon > debian, if we only support chrooting bind via mount --bind and not > offering alternative at least for users of kernel 2.2.x. yes that is absurd. lets look at this: people see debian only supports chrooted bind on 2.4 kernels because of mount --bind, they can do either: a) manually configure a 2.2 capable chroot for bind manually. b) be irrational, dump debian, and configure a chrooted bind manually. now what exactly did switching distros buy them? > At least I would be upset if I install a bind package which just offers > to chroot itself when I use kernel 2.4.x and not when I use a kernel > 2.2.x. That would offend me and make me look for an other distribution > where either I get full support for chrooting bind or completely do it > manually, independent from the kernel version. so i assume you are offended that woody cannot support moduler 2.0 kernels. > Then please respect also the Debian Free Software Guidelines, that > clearly state: > > | 4. Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software > | > | We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free-software > | community. We will place their interests first in our priorities. We and please respect Policy section 11.7 regarding configuration files. > Hm, I would say that rndc (ndc for bind 8) would still work, so that you > would only need SIGHUP seldom. So option 1 sounds like a possible > solution to me. depends how you sync the conffiles. bind can't see the config files in /etc which is what the admin will edit. -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
Attachment:
pgpZjGjdXVsw1.pgp
Description: PGP signature