Am 23.07.20 um 06:28 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt:
> But truthfully you are proving my point. The simple fact is that bind
> will compile WITHOUT using a FreeBSD port. Linux is 10 times worse
> because they aren't even including the c compiler or development tools
> anymore.
that's nonsense and
On 7/23/2020 7:44 AM, charlie derr wrote:
While it would still *technically* be security by obscurity, it would
seem to me that there's some value to this approach because access to
the compiled binary wouldn't necessarily be easy to obtain (especially
if the sysadmin provisioning the system
On Thu, 23 Jul 2020, charlie derr wrote:
On 7/23/20 9:49 AM, Michael De Roover wrote:
[...]
For this to work at all though, they'd have to provide all packages
simply as source code (why not use the distribution's own source
repositories?) and compile it on the target.
[...]
While it would
On 7/23/20 10:44 AM, charlie derr wrote:
> Caveat: i'm far from an expert on compiling, linking, disassembling,
> etc... (in fact i know *very* little about these domains), so it's
> possible my comment/question below won't even really make sense.
>
> Still, i'm not going to learn more without
Caveat: i'm far from an expert on compiling, linking, disassembling,
etc... (in fact i know *very* little about these domains), so it's
possible my comment/question below won't even really make sense.
Still, i'm not going to learn more without asking, so...
On 7/23/20 9:49 AM, Michael De Roover
The idea is pretty interesting, seems like they provide a repository
with packages compiled with their own compiler that changes various
memory-related elements. It is true that memory is usually the culprit
behind security flaws.
According to their page at
Perhaps slightly OT, but here's a company which has a whole business model
based on one nonobvious (?) reason to compile from source:
https://polyverse.com/
--
Fred Morris
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
If you're running Alpine, you should know that it uses MUSL which has a
stub resolver which is/was lacking in some respects:
http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/Outgoing-DANE-not-working-tp105397p105420.html
On Thu, 23 Jul 2020, Michael De Roover wrote:
[...]
With my internal BIND servers
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 4:24 AM @lbutlr wrote:
>
> On 20 Jul 2020, at 11:45, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > When FreeBSD was used mostly for servers it wasn't a problem. But more
> > and more people are using it for desktop use where they want to basically
> > install it and forget about it, never
On 7/23/20 7:19 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Well for starters there is no way for ME to validate that the compiled
software you built for me isn't busy running your Doom network server
behind my back. (do people still even run Doom servers?)
People would find out when an unnecessary service
On 7/22/2020 9:59 PM, Michael De Roover wrote:
On 7/23/20 6:28 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Linux is 10 times worse because they aren't even including the c
compiler or development tools
anymore.
Every distribution I've laid my hands on so far has GCC packages and
most development packages
On 7/23/20 6:28 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Linux is 10 times worse because they aren't even including the c
compiler or development tools
anymore.
Every distribution I've laid my hands on so far has GCC packages and
most development packages affixed with either -dev or -devel (most of
the
On 7/20/2020 4:05 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
Distributions also need to look at their own practices. They ask us
to supply long term support but do not actually integrate the
maintenance releases but instead cherry-pick just the security fixes.
Maintenance is not just security fixes. That
> On 22 Jul 2020, at 08:23, @lbutlr wrote:
>
> On 21 Jul 2020, at 06:37, Mark Andrews wrote:
>> On 21 Jul 2020, at 18:23, @lbutlr wrote:
>>>
>>> Bind is a poor choice for desktop use. Packages like unbound are much
>>> better for that sort of use, and it is fr less critical if those
On 21 Jul 2020, at 06:37, Mark Andrews wrote:
> On 21 Jul 2020, at 18:23, @lbutlr wrote:
>>
>> Bind is a poor choice for desktop use. Packages like unbound are much better
>> for that sort of use, and it is fr less critical if those packages have
>> security issues.
>
> Anything that talks
> On 21 Jul 2020, at 18:23, @lbutlr wrote:
>
> On 20 Jul 2020, at 10:09, tale wrote:
>> And for what it's worth, not all systems moved away from "named" to
>> "bind9". I've been running FreeBSD for decades, and I can't remember
>> ever calling the service "bind9".
>
> The service is always
Am 20.07.20 um 19:45 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt:
> On 7/17/2020 11:35 AM, John W. Blue wrote:
>> Speaking about things to be annoyed over ..
>>
>> I am still ticked that FreeBSD dropped BIND from the distribution for
>> something called unwinding or whatever it is.
>>
>
> I'm not happy that
On 20 Jul 2020, at 10:09, tale wrote:
> And for what it's worth, not all systems moved away from "named" to
> "bind9". I've been running FreeBSD for decades, and I can't remember
> ever calling the service "bind9".
The service is always named, the package is bind. I stopped adding the 9 many
orted for a longer
>> period of time. Also, Unbound's main purpose in life is as a caching
>> dns program. Nobody who runs a server on FreeBSD uses Unbound.
>>
>> Ted
>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-
>>> From: bi
ginal Message-
>> From: bind-users [mailto:bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Ted
>> Mittelstaedt
>> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 12:57 PM
>> To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
>> Subject: Re: AW: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was the service renamed from bind9 to
>&g
Sorry about that, the email might've been a bit too emotionally loaded.
The issues pile up.. and that's eventually the result.
I'm not using FreeBSD anywhere anymore but found some resources online
suggesting that the package name is bind916. The closest I could find to
unwinded is Unbound
On 7/20/2020 11:23 AM, Michael De Roover wrote:
If that is true, I hereby lost all faith in humanity.. well whatever
faith I had left. This has been going on for like half a decade now.
Nobody ever went broke catering to the human desire for ease
If that is true, I hereby lost all faith in humanity.. well whatever
faith I had left. This has been going on for like half a decade now.
A few weeks ago I saw here on the list someone suggesting that BIND is a
reference to bondage in BDSM, so perhaps it has to do with that... Lest
we forget
-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Ted
Mittelstaedt
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 12:57 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: AW: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was the service renamed from bind9 to named?
Your personal experience is not the gobal truth. It is your opinion but other
experienced
> And for what it's worth, not all systems moved away from "named" to
> "bind9". I've been running FreeBSD for decades, and I can't remember
> ever calling the service "bind9".
No one ever calls named anything other than named. In a sane world.
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 7:06 AM @lbutlr wrote:
> On 17 Jul 2020, at 11:56, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > In fact, the ONLY reason that the name "bind9" was ever even coined
> > at all was because the changes from bind8 both in the syntax of the
> > config file and how the program operated they
On 17 Jul 2020, at 11:56, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> In fact, the ONLY reason that the name "bind9" was ever even coined
> at all was because the changes from bind8 both in the syntax of the
> config file and how the program operated they wanted to boot admins
> in the behind to get them to change
> So as an experienced person who has been doing this you-nuxs thing since
> 1982 - I DON'T see it different - and in fact, I see it as a RETURN to
> what it originally was!
Exactly ! Hear hear ! Well said.
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and
: Friday, July 17, 2020 12:57 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: AW: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was the service renamed from bind9 to named?
>
> Your personal experience is not the gobal truth. It is your opinion but other
> experienced pepole see it different than you.
>
Hmm I'
Your personal experience is not the gobal truth. It is your opinion but other
experienced pepole see it different than you.
Hmm I'm a bit late to this discussion but I will chime in with the
others. The service always was called "named" pronounced "name Dee"
it was called that in the
On 4/15/20 8:15 AM, Ondřej Surý wrote:
Klaus,
the default and preferred init system on both Debian and Ubuntu is systemd,
and the unit has proper Alias, so it is recognized also under "bind9" name.
The sysv-rc script doesn’t have the capability of aliases, so unfortunately,
there’s
a downfall
On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 14:21 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 15.04.20 um 14:17 schrieb Jim Popovitch via bind-users:
> > On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 10:35 +0200, Klaus Darilion wrote:
> > > Thanks for answer!
> > >
> > > So actually it is just a cosmetic change not addressing a real problem.
> > >
Am 15.04.20 um 14:17 schrieb Jim Popovitch via bind-users:
> On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 10:35 +0200, Klaus Darilion wrote:
>> Thanks for answer!
>>
>> So actually it is just a cosmetic change not addressing a real problem.
>>
>> I will miss the bind9 service :-(
>
>
> Wait until you find out about
On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 10:35 +0200, Klaus Darilion wrote:
> Thanks for answer!
>
> So actually it is just a cosmetic change not addressing a real problem.
>
> I will miss the bind9 service :-(
Wait until you find out about Predicatable Network Interface Names and
iptables rules. :)
-Jim P.
On Wed 15/Apr/2020 10:15:09 +0200 Ondřej Surý wrote:
> The renaming was done as it was a logical choice, the service is starting a
> daemon,
> and not a package, and daemon name is `named`. Also it is the name used by RPM
> based systems and Arch Linux and Gentoo, so it was also made to make BIND
> Am 15.04.20 um 10:08 schrieb Ondřej Surý:
> > you need to stop being rude to people on the bind-users mailing list,
> > personal attacks are not acceptable behaviour here. You should apologize
> > to Klaus.
>
> it's not a personal attack to clearly point out that discussions of
> distribution
c.org
> Betreff: Re: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was the service renamed from bind9 to
> named?
>
> Klaus,
>
> the default and preferred init system on both Debian and Ubuntu is systemd,
> and the unit has proper Alias, so it is recognized also under "bind9" name.
>
Am 15.04.20 um 10:08 schrieb Ondřej Surý:
> you need to stop being rude to people on the bind-users mailing list,
> personal attacks are not acceptable behaviour here. You should apologize
> to Klaus.
it's not a personal attack to clearly point out that discussions of
distribution level changes
Klaus,
the default and preferred init system on both Debian and Ubuntu is systemd,
and the unit has proper Alias, so it is recognized also under "bind9" name.
The sysv-rc script doesn’t have the capability of aliases, so unfortunately,
there’s
a downfall from the renaming, but it would not make
something is broken *before* complain and so it's a logicla assumption
the alias is missing
Debian/Ubuntu packages and what should be done there before the next
major release of the distribution don't belong here anyways
Weitergeleitete Nachricht
Betreff: Re: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was t
> On 15 Apr 2020, at 09:05, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> BTW in case Debian/Ubuntu when they do RTFM it wouldn't be an issue at all
Is this the case of you being rude instead of getting the facts?
bind9 (1:9.15.3-2) unstable; urgency=medium
* Fix the section for bind9 alias in the systemd unit
Am 15.04.20 um 09:42 schrieb Klaus Darilion:
>> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
>> Von: bind-users Im Auftrag von Reindl
>> Harald
>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. April 2020 09:17
>> An: bind-users@lists.isc.org
>> Betreff: Re: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was the se
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: bind-users Im Auftrag von Reindl
> Harald
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. April 2020 09:17
> An: bind-users@lists.isc.org
> Betreff: Re: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was the service renamed from bind9 to
> named?
>
>
>
> Am 15.04.2
Am 15.04.20 um 09:21 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail:
> On 4/15/2020 3:09 AM, Klaus Darilion wrote:
>> I do not complain about the version number, but of the name.
>>
>> And in my opinion it is not sane to call a service/package httpd if the name
>> of the software is Apache.
>
> For me, adding the
On 4/15/2020 3:09 AM, Klaus Darilion wrote:
> I do not complain about the version number, but of the name.
>
> And in my opinion it is not sane to call a service/package httpd if the name
> of the software is Apache.
For me, adding the version number can make sense if there is an
intention to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Wed, 15 Apr 2020, Klaus Darilion wrote:
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: bind-users Im Auftrag von Reindl
Harald
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. April 2020 09:05
An: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Betreff: Re: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was the service
Am 15.04.20 um 09:09 schrieb Klaus Darilion:
>>> It would be great if you undo this change before release of 18.04
>>
>> you confuse the upstream project with your distribution
>>
>> bind9 was completly wrong in the debian world as well as apache2 for
>> httpd, on sane distributions it's
Am 15.04.20 um 09:08 schrieb Klaus Darilion:
The software is "Bind 9". The package is "bind9". The service for long time
>> was "bind9". The config is in /etc/bind. Only the binary is named. So it
>> would
>> have made more sense to rename the binary. (actually the binary is not so
>>
> > It would be great if you undo this change before release of 18.04
>
> you confuse the upstream project with your distribution
>
> bind9 was completly wrong in the debian world as well as apache2 for
> httpd, on sane distributions it's "httpt" and "named" all the years
> beause it's nonsense
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: bind-users Im Auftrag von Reindl
> Harald
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. April 2020 09:05
> An: bind-users@lists.isc.org
> Betreff: Re: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was the service renamed from bind9 to
> named?
>
>
>
> Am 15.04.
Am 15.04.20 um 08:56 schrieb Reindl Harald:
>
>
> Am 15.04.20 um 08:51 schrieb Klaus Darilion:
>> Hello!
>>
>> What is the rationale of:
>>
>> bind9 (1:9.13.6-1) experimental; urgency=medium
>> ...
>> * Rename the init scripts to named to match the name of the daemon
>>
>>
>> Since years,
Am 15.04.20 um 08:51 schrieb Klaus Darilion:
> Hello!
>
> What is the rationale of:
>
> bind9 (1:9.13.6-1) experimental; urgency=medium
> ...
> * Rename the init scripts to named to match the name of the daemon
>
>
> Since years, Debian and Ubuntu User, and plenty of scripts and
Hello!
What is the rationale of:
bind9 (1:9.13.6-1) experimental; urgency=medium
...
* Rename the init scripts to named to match the name of the daemon
Since years, Debian and Ubuntu User, and plenty of scripts and automation
software (Puppet ...), know that the service is called "bind9". I
53 matches
Mail list logo
