Re: Using bind9, instead of the default bind8
+++ stan [freebsd] [30-01-04 14:31 -0500]: | On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 04:52:12PM -, Edmund Craske wrote: | > There's something wrong with the rc.conf stuff for named if you install the bind9 port over the base bind8 (by doing a make | > -DPORT_REPLACES_BASE_BIND9 install clean in dns/bind9) because of differences in command line arguments. Of course, you could just | > work it out and hash it together, or leave the base bind8 alone entirely and install bind9 as a separate port... It doesn't really | > matter either way, just make sure you're executing the bind9 named instead of the bind8 one. | > | | Thnaks for the advice. | | I found the startup flags issue. it's as simple as not needing the "-g | bind". Only the -u bind is allowd. | | I suppose I should make an effort to run this chrooted. Given that I did | specify the DPORT_REPLACES_BASE_BIND9 optin, would the correct palce tp | chroot be /etc/namedb? | | -- | "They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve | neither liberty nor safety." | -- Benjamin Franklin | | -- following is the line from /etc/defaults/rc.conf named_program="/usr/sbin/named" Now in your rc.conf file change the path. Shantanoo ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Using bind9, instead of the default bind8
On Friday 30 January 2004 20:31, stan wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 04:52:12PM -, Edmund Craske wrote: > > There's something wrong with the rc.conf stuff for named if you install > > the bind9 port over the base bind8 (by doing a make > > -DPORT_REPLACES_BASE_BIND9 install clean in dns/bind9) because of > > differences in command line arguments. Of course, you could just work it > > out and hash it together, or leave the base bind8 alone entirely and > > install bind9 as a separate port... It doesn't really matter either way, > > just make sure you're executing the bind9 named instead of the bind8 one. > > Thnaks for the advice. > > I found the startup flags issue. it's as simple as not needing the "-g > bind". Only the -u bind is allowd. > > I suppose I should make an effort to run this chrooted. Given that I did > specify the DPORT_REPLACES_BASE_BIND9 optin, would the correct palce tp > chroot be /etc/namedb? I've got a patch for this for -CURRENT (rcng), filed it at: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=61647 -- Melvyn === FreeBSD sarevok.webteckies.org 5.2-CURRENT FreeBSD 5.2-CURRENT #0: Wed Jan 28 18:01:18 CET 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SAREVOK_NOAPM_NODEBUG i386 === pgp0.pgp Description: signature
Re: Using bind9, instead of the default bind8
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 04:52:12PM -, Edmund Craske wrote: > There's something wrong with the rc.conf stuff for named if you install the bind9 > port over the base bind8 (by doing a make > -DPORT_REPLACES_BASE_BIND9 install clean in dns/bind9) because of differences in > command line arguments. Of course, you could just > work it out and hash it together, or leave the base bind8 alone entirely and install > bind9 as a separate port... It doesn't really > matter either way, just make sure you're executing the bind9 named instead of the > bind8 one. > Thnaks for the advice. I found the startup flags issue. it's as simple as not needing the "-g bind". Only the -u bind is allowd. I suppose I should make an effort to run this chrooted. Given that I did specify the DPORT_REPLACES_BASE_BIND9 optin, would the correct palce tp chroot be /etc/namedb? -- "They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Using bind9, instead of the default bind8
There's something wrong with the rc.conf stuff for named if you install the bind9 port over the base bind8 (by doing a make -DPORT_REPLACES_BASE_BIND9 install clean in dns/bind9) because of differences in command line arguments. Of course, you could just work it out and hash it together, or leave the base bind8 alone entirely and install bind9 as a separate port... It doesn't really matter either way, just make sure you're executing the bind9 named instead of the bind8 one. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Huff > Sent: 30 January 2004 15:51 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Using bind9, instead of the default bind8 > > > > stan writes: > > > What's involed in using bind9, instead of the default bind > 8. I have > > made the port, but it seems that I probably need to somehow delete > > the existing bind8, right? > > Look in /etc/rc.conf - there are variables for the bind > program and command line flags. > You will also want to check the configuration files. > There are some obscure but potentially important changes > between the versions. I think bind provides a tool for this. > > > Robert Huff > > > ___ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/free> bsd-questions > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
