Re: FreeBSD 10 Beta2 /etc/rc.d/named script and /etc/defaults/rc.conf

On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 12:11:02PM +0100, Erwin Lansing wrote:
E> > On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 01:41:01AM +0200, George Kontostanos wrote:
E> > G> > Am 03.11.2013 um 23:06 schrieb Gleb Smirnoff <glebius_at_FreeBSD.org>:
E> > G> >
E> > G> > > On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 10:05:02PM +0200, Özkan KIRIK wrote:
E> > G> > > Ö> Altough bind removed from FreeBSD 10 distribution, "/etc/rc.d/named"
E> > G> > script
E> > G> > > Ö> still exists.
E> > G> > > Ö> and this script depends on "/etc/mtree/BIND.chroot.dist" file but
E> > G> > there is
E> > G> > > Ö> no such file in source tree.
E> > G> > > Ö> I think this file was forgotten to be removed.
E> > G> > > Ö>
E> > G> > > Ö> And also, named_* definitions still exists in /etc/defaults/rc.conf
E> > G> > file.
E> > G> > >
E> > G> > > Please review attached file that removes named from /etc.
E> > G> >
E> > G> > It would be great if the port would learn to install its own script etc.
E> > G> > in time for that change. (Unless it’s already there, and I’m just too blind
E> > G> > to see it.)
E> > G> 
E> > G> No you are not blind. Installing bind from ports still relies on the
E> > G> /etc/rc.d/named script.
E> > 
E> > Erwin, can you please handle that?
E> 
E> Things are much worse that this, the ports are completely written under the assumption that there is a Bind in base, which of course would already break with WITHOUT_BIND before Bind was completely removed.  It will be hard to fix without breaking the installed base of 8 and 9.  Sigh.
E> 
E> I'll try to work on it this week, but unfortunately have a full schedule of meetings and travel as well.

What should we do with src? 

IMO, we should proceed with removal of remnants of bind in src. In the worst case,
if you can't handle it this week, the situation will be the following:

1) 8.x, 9.x users are okay
2) 10+.x users w/o bind are okay
3) 10+.x users with bind have problems

If we skip updating src, then situation would be:

1) 8.x, 9.x users are okay
2) 10+.x users w/o bind have problems
3) 10+.x users with bind are okay

I think, there are less 10.x users with bind, than 10.x without it.

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.