Re: When bind9 reinstalls, no db.root
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 07:32:04PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 04:23:16PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 07:06:22PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > _Any_ program whose default (Debian) configuration file specifies
> > > options which are different from the compiled-in defaults.
> > >
> > > For specific examples, see almost any program on your system with a
> > > global config file.
> > Hand-waving doesn't constitute an example.
> How about bash? A missing /etc/bash.bashrc has a different effect than the
> default /etc/bash.bashrc. A missing /etc/bash_completion has a different
> effect than the default /etc/bash_completion. Missing /etc/skel/.bash* will
> avoid having any .bash* files copied into new users' home directories. I
> think that you have bash installed (assuming you run Debian), so you now
> have an example that you can experiment with on your own system. And you
> didn't have to go to the trouble of figuring it out for yourself.
> You may shut up now.
This terse reply is obviously inappropriate. If you are annoyed, stop
I was asking for real examples in order to discuss how the case of
bind and db.root is *not* a member of that set and how there may be a
genuine problem with the handling of installing over missing
As far as I can tell there is no way to pass --force-confmiss to dpkg
when using apt-get. Perhaps this is the only real omission.
Still, breaking bind's access to root name servers is particularly
troublesome because it may tend to break all net access. It may be
worthwhile to remove db.root from the list of configuration files.
Especially, because this list isn't something anyone should need to