[Bundy-hackers] Fwd: Bundy idea
Carsten Strotmann carsten at strotmann.deFri Sep 12 08:48:33 CEST 2014
- Previous message: [Bundy-hackers] Fwd: Bundy idea
- Next message: [Bundy-hackers] Fwd: Bundy idea
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hello David, David Carlier wrote: > it is compile setting via configure ... I occasionally build installation packages of DNS servers for Unix systems (Linux, BSD, Solaris, MacOS X). Every compile time option can create a new package. Each combination of compile time options will create a new package etc etc. So for BIND 9.9.x I have plain without DNSSEC with Response Rate Limiting with DLZ with XML without DNSSEC with RRL without DNSSEC with DLZ without DNSSEC with XML with DNSSEC, XML and DLZ without DNSSEC, but with XML and DLZ .... As a package maintainer I have a choice of enabling everything (but that is what administrators dislike for performance and security reasons), or selectively enable / disable compile-time features. Compile time options are great for people who build the software from source (or Gentoo users). Compile time options can be a package maintainers nightmare. One of the design goals of BIND 10 and now Bundy is to have less compile time decisions and more run-time dynamic loading through modules. With the modularization in Bundy, a package maintainer can enable all modules, and the user/administrator can decide which modules to load at runtime. For these reasons I would prefer a geolocation module. -- Carsten
- Previous message: [Bundy-hackers] Fwd: Bundy idea
- Next message: [Bundy-hackers] Fwd: Bundy idea
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]