-On [20010804 04:30], Jun Kuriyama ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Are there any reasons not to use -u bind flag for named by default?
Last time I discussed this with some people it was said that named will
have a fit if you change the interface's IP address. It apparantly
cannot accomodate for
Are there any reasons not to use -u bind flag for named by default?
# Or importing code to use chroot from OpenBSD?
--
Jun Kuriyama [EMAIL PROTECTED] // IMG SRC, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] // FreeBSD Project
bind.diff
Jun Kuriyama [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At Fri, 03 Aug 2001 19:50:24 -0700,
Dima Dorfman wrote:
IIRC the last time this came up somebody said something about it not
being able to read zonefiles in some odd places where they like to put
them. I.e., they want it to run as root so they can
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 19:50:24 -0700
From: Dima Dorfman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Are there any reasons not to use -u bind flag for named by default?
IIRC the last time this came up somebody said something about it not
being able to read zonefiles in some odd places where they like to put
them.
