Package: bind9 Version: 1:9.2.4-1 Severity: normal Hi,
I really think that file db.local should be renamed. There are at least two reasons: 1. Files ending with .local are expected to be local configuration files, like named.conf.local or /etc/cron.d/update-antivirus.local. By adding a .local to a filename one expects to create a filename that will not be used by system packages. Bind package breaks this expectation. 2. When you want to create a domain called .local for your local computers (a TLD that will not be visible from internet), you have to think hard to create a filename for it, since db.local is already taken. Ok, .local domain is not reserved for this purpose by any RFC as far as I know, but it is widely used. I propose renaming file db.local to something like db.loopback or db.localhost. thanks for considering this proposal, Matus Horvath -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.12.1.blackbird.1 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1) Versions of packages bind9 depends on: ii adduser 3.63 Add and remove users and groups ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-22 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libdns16 1:9.2.4-1 DNS Shared Library used by BIND ii libisc7 1:9.2.4-1 ISC Shared Library used by BIND ii libisccc0 1:9.2.4-1 Command Channel Library used by BI ii libisccfg0 1:9.2.4-1 Config File Handling Library used ii liblwres1 1:9.2.4-1 Lightweight Resolver Library used ii libssl0.9.7 0.9.7e-3 SSL shared libraries ii netbase 4.21 Basic TCP/IP networking system -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
