Thanks, that is one good reason use the compiled version. The binary updates from the OS vendor takes long time always.
-- arun On 17 May 2016 at 14:54, Benno Overeinder <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Maybe not yet available in all distributions, but you might want to go > with OpenDNSSEC 1.4.10 that includes many important bug fixes. > > — Benno > > > > On 17 May 2016, at 11:27, Arun Natarajan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Thanks for the suggestion. > > > > On 15 May 2016 at 13:13, Emil Natan <[email protected]> wrote: > > As a rule of a thumb (for me at least), if DNS/DNSSEC is your core > business go for the source and building the software by yourself. You would > like finer control over build and features. Otherwise stick with whatever > provided by the OS. > > > > ena > > > > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Arun N S <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Any recommendation for the opendnssec / softhsm installation candidates > for production? Should we stick with the OS shipped version > softhsm-2.0.0rc1-3.el7.x86_64, opendnssec-1.4.7-3.el7.x86_64 (incase of > Redhat 7) or compile and install the latest stable from opendnssec.org? > > > > thanks, > > > > -- > > arun > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Opendnssec-user mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.opendnssec.org/mailman/listinfo/opendnssec-user > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Opendnssec-user mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.opendnssec.org/mailman/listinfo/opendnssec-user > > -- > Benno J. Overeinder > NLnet Labs > http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ > >
_______________________________________________ Opendnssec-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendnssec.org/mailman/listinfo/opendnssec-user
