9.15.8: task.h includes uninstalled netmgr.h
Hi, I didn't find a bind-devel mailing list, so I'm sending this here. After a plain ./configure && make install, I see in the installed task.h header file that it includes netmgr.h, but netmgr.h is not installed. It's not listed in HEADERS in lib/isc/include/isc/Makefile.in. Is this expected? ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: 9.15.8: task.h includes uninstalled netmgr.h
Hi, On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 6:44 PM Mark Andrews wrote: > > Thanks of the report. For the record, you can submit issues at > https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/bind9/issues. Thanks, I first wanted to be sure it was an actual issue, and not me by mistake installing a header file I shouldn't :) ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: 9.15.8: task.h includes uninstalled netmgr.h
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 11:26 PM Dennis Clarke via bind-users wrote: > > On 2020-02-19 16:01, Andreas Hasenack wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I didn't find a bind-devel mailing list, so I'm sending this here. > > > > After a plain ./configure && make install, I see in the installed > > task.h header file that it includes netmgr.h, but netmgr.h is not > > installed. It's not listed in HEADERS in > > lib/isc/include/isc/Makefile.in. Is this expected? > > Please see > > https://kb.isc.org/docs/aa-01540 > > Not sure what version you are looking at but I have seen bind work on > just about everything everywhere for at least twenty years. Actually > more than that. The recent bumb in the road over someone doing Python > scripts in the code base it funny but easily worked around. Otherwise > ISC Bind "just works"(tm) and so I am curious what version you have > there ? It was 9.15.8 ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: Security sssues with Ubuntu bind9 11.9.3 ?
Hello On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 1:28 PM Brett Delmage wrote: > But 1:9.11.3+dfsg-1ubuntu1.1 is the version that Ubuntu 18.04 LTS supports, > and > will continue to for 2 more years. Bionic has 1:9.11.3+dfsg-1ubuntu1.11 in the bionic-security pocket. Please check /usr/share/doc/bind9/changelog.Debian.gz for the fixes and changes it has on top of upstream's 9.11.3. ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: New releases of BIND are available: 9.11.17, 9.16.1, and 9.17.0
Hello, On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 8:25 PM Michael McNally wrote: > > New releases of BIND are available which contain bug fixes and feature > improvements. > You can download them from the ISC website: > >https://www.isc.org/downloads > > Release notes can be found via these links: > > Stable release branches: > 9.11.17: > https://downloads.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.11.17/RELEASE-NOTES-bind-9.11.17.html > 9.16.1: > https://downloads.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.16.1/RELEASE-NOTES-bind-9.16.1.html I'm about to update ubuntu's bind9 9.16.0 to 9.16.1, and wanted to ask about the pros and cons of this feature change: """ The system-provided POSIX Threads read-write lock implementation is now used by default instead of the native BIND 9 implementation. """ Ubuntu was highlighted in that change due to a bug in bionic[1], for which I have an SRU prepared and am just waiting on a review from my colleagues. There are ppa packages for testing, if someone wants to verify it. glibc is not a package I maintain, but I have an interest in bind9 working well, so I jumped in. But my question is about the upcoming ubuntu focal 20.04, which has an unaffected glibc. Since this is a feature change, and we are in Feature Freeze, I'll have to justify it to the archive admins, and wanted to get some input on what this change makes better. I understand it's your recommendation to use it, since it's the new upstream default, but do you have some more details? Thanks! 1. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/1864864 ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
DLZ: dlz/modules, dlz/drivers ?
Hi, contrib/README says that dlz/drivers are the old style dlz support, and one should use dlz/modules. ./configure dlz options, however, seem to enable exactly dlz/drivers, i.e., the "deprecated" one, instead of dlz/modules. What is the status of contrib/dlz/modules? Their build doesn't look to be integrated with the rest of the build system. ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information. bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
