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

Re: NMU'ing for wishlist bugs? (aka: intent to NMU bind9)

Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> [2002-09-16 16:10:58 -0400]:
> * Bob Proulx (bob@proulx.com) wrote:
> > Agreed.  I consider bind locally a standard installation.  Over a
> There are alot of reasons to not one run too.

Agreed.  There is no such thing as "one size fits all".  However there
are sometimes only "one size".  Trying to avoid that case.

> There is no overriding reason or need for named to have an entry in
> base-passwd.  It's simple enough for the package to add the user.
> Even ssh does this, and for much the same reason.

Note that I was only stating that a local named is very common and was
refuting the statements that no one runs one.  I expressed no opinion
on whether 'named' should be in base-passwd or not.

As long as I am here, previous mention of keeping uids consistent over
NFS, I believe anyone that is running NFS and wants uids to be
consistent across hosts will likely also be running NIS/YP as well.
Not requied but probably very likely.  In that case, I just checked,
if an NIS entry exists for the user you are trying to add then adduser
will complain and exit non-zero.  The 'getent' program will report the
user from NIS.  There is undoubtedly a way to install, detect 'named'
in NIS and react accordingly.


Attachment: pgpRAHTcmN6Ye.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: