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

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

On 01/10/01, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2001 at 07:34:29PM +0200, Christian Kurz wrote:
> > 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.
> Well, if Debian means so little to you, go ahead. See if I care.

See, I don't care about this anymore, because I'm fed up with that here.
(Reasons in my other mail in this thread.) So why should I care about
anyone else in this discussion anymore?
> > 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?

Aren't you reading my mails completely? You already asked that kind of
question before and I answered it. Instead you removed that part here,
didn't comment it and instead try to make me look like a stupid boy.
Thanks. :-(
> Perhaps you could backport mount --bind to 2.2. That would solve

Why should I do this kind of stuff? There's cp,rsync,etc, so there's no
need for this feature or to depend on it.

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

Attachment: pgppeuY1I0eYr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: