[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: bind9-chroot (was: questions on ITP)

On 30/09/01, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2001 at 10:36:16AM +0200, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > On 30/09/01, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2001 at 06:56:00PM +0200, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > > > for this purpose. So instead of sending in a patch, I would stop
> > > > installing debian on any machine that should be a nameserver and switch
> > > > to an os, where either I get a chrooted bind by default or directly can
> > > > build a chroot manually.

> > > You implied that you couldn't build a manual chroot for bind on Debian.

> > May I ask why you oversee the last part of the sentence you were
> > quoting? There I stated "directly can build a chroot manually.". So

> Huh? You said you would switch to an OS that allowed you to build
> a chroot for bind manually, implying that this is not possible on
> Debian.

It's still possible, but tell me a good reason why I should keep debian
on my server, when it offers my to chroot bind, but only if I use the
latest kernel? I see no need to keep debian in that case as os for the
server and so I can switch it.

> I think you're being absurd. A bind package which requires 2.4
> for automatic chroot is better than one which has no automatic
> chroot at all, isn't it? 

No, because we already have now for quite some time a bind package in
debian without an automatic chroot. So we should either offer a chroot
for both kernel versions 2.4.x and 2.2.x or still stay with the old
packages offering no automatic chroot.

> Why is it unreasonable to expect people
> to be using 2.4 on their name servers?

Because it's not stable and still has VM issues. Aren't you aware about
the problems with 2.4.x and that people on linux-kernel still recommend
2.2.x as stable kernel? 

I prefer having a kernel on my server that is stable and has proven so
and not one, which still hasn't proven as stable and has VM issues.

           Debian Developer (http://www.debian.org)
1024/26CC7853 31E6 A8CA 68FC 284F 7D16  63EC A9E6 67FF 26CC 7853

Attachment: pgpGgFMxZ_loq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: