On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 11:12:24PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo: > > > While udns has no entered etch or lenny, we should reconsider that > > situation in the case of squeeze. Some software in Debian depends or > > may be improved while depending on udns. > > udns doesn't handle truncation, so it won't play well with the > PowerDNS recursor (which doesn't support EDNS). > > It does not use a connected UDP socket, so it won't notice ICMP > errors. (This means that it's only suitable for long-running > processes.) > > The escape sequences it uses inside TXT records are hexadecimal, not > decimal, as it is standard for DNS software. > > The domain name parser triggers undefined behavior for certain inputs > because it performs out-of-bound pointer arithmetic. This is unlikely > to cause practical problems with current GCC versions (but LTO might > change this). > > Sorry for being unconstructive, but I really don't think we need yet > another DNS resolver in Debian.
Thadeu, since no package uses current udns and upstream recommends switching to ldns, should we go ahead and remove udns from the archive? Cheers, Moritz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org