"Bjoern A. Zeeb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there any chance to get bind back w/o threading support? I guess > the question is more to Doug than to you. > > I found it usefull especially for (CF) installations where I > neither needed pppctl nor any other thing that depended on a threading > library but a caching nameserver. Going with a port for this > means supporting the ports infrastructure respectively an extra > installation procedure. Nothing that can't be done just extra pain;-) > So far it was easier to go with just base and live with the size of > named.
I can't imagine a situation where you would want to run BIND but couldn't spare the disk space for libthr. Size in kB of named and its dependencies on -CURRENT: 1616 named 1584 libcrypto.so.5 1120 libc.so.7 80 libthr.so.3 On a production name server, /var/named alone would easily outwheigh libthr. DES -- Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
