On Sep 24, 2010, at 12:51 PM, Tony Finch wrote:
> A default build of bind expects to find it in /etc/named.conf
> If you are running chrooted it needs to be copied into the chroot.
Most systems these days have packages of BIND. Those that do tend to have
BIND-chroot as an option for install.
Hello,
I have few questions about TXT RR. Can I store non-ASCII text in the record?
If I do it with nsupdate, record is saved correctly (UTF is converted into
two bytes - \x\y - x- first byte, y - second byte). But it's correct? Can I
do this? Or is it right to save only ASCII text? Thanks for
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, Stewart Dean wrote:
> 1) I assume the canonical location of named.conf is always in /etc?
A default build of bind expects to find it in /etc/named.conf
If you are running chrooted it needs to be copied into the chroot.
> 2) My home-built binary is nearly 7MB, while the CentO
And of course VMWare is 80% owned by EMC:
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2010/03/03/emc_to_maintain_80_vmware_stake/
-Original Message-
From: Dale Kiefling [mailto:dale.kiefl...@cbsinteractive.com]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 1:46 PM
To: Lightner, Jeff
Cc: dhottin
Some info from the core dump:
General info:
Core was generated by `/usr/local/sbin/named -4 -c /etc/named.conf -t
/var/lib/named -u named -n 4'.
Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault.
#0 0x0813d4d7 in resquery_udpconnected (task=0x8230ef88, event=0xa5bbf068)
at resolver.c:1
To answer some of your direct questions directly:
On 9/24/2010 11:58 AM, Stewart Dean wrote:
More questions...(CentOS 5.5, bind-9.7.1-P2)
1) I assume the canonical location of named.conf is always in /etc?
Nobody (Little grasshopper from ORA, google) says so, but there are
intimations here
On 24/09/10 17:22, Lars Hecking wrote:
Stewart Dean writes:
More questions...(CentOS 5.5, bind-9.7.1-P2)
The arguably easiest way to deal with this, if you prefer a recent version
of bind on CentOS, is to grab the most recent srpm from the updates/testing
directory of your nearest Fedo
Stewart Dean writes:
> More questions...(CentOS 5.5, bind-9.7.1-P2)
The arguably easiest way to deal with this, if you prefer a recent version
of bind on CentOS, is to grab the most recent srpm from the updates/testing
directory of your nearest Fedora mirror and simply* rebuild it. Current
Fe
More questions...(CentOS 5.5, bind-9.7.1-P2)
1) I assume the canonical location of named.conf is always in /etc? Nobody
(Little grasshopper from ORA, google) says so, but there are intimations here
and there.
2) My home-built binary is nearly 7MB, while the CentOS distro binary is about
400
Quoting "Lightner, Jeff" :
Technical note: I said "Netware" not "Novell". As you note Novell is
now doing SuSE Linux.
I believe there are still people using Netware but then again there are
probably still people using CP/M somewhere. :-)
-Original Message-
From: bind-users-bounces+jl
Technical note: I said "Netware" not "Novell". As you note Novell is
now doing SuSE Linux.
I believe there are still people using Netware but then again there are
probably still people using CP/M somewhere. :-)
-Original Message-
From: bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.
Quoting "Lightner, Jeff" :
Up until Bill came out with NT with the stated intention of killing UNIX
I was somewhat of an M$ fan (over Apple that is). All he really
succeeded in killing was Netware. Now years later Apple is running a
UNIX based OS - go figure.
-Original Message-
From:
If you want that level of separation, why not go even further and have a
separate instance of named running on a separate address? I assume you
have a way to selectively tell clients to use a different address for
DNS resolution, either through DHCP, /etc/resolv.conf or interactively
via the co
Quoting Stewart Dean :
On AIX, I'm used to /etc/dns. CentOS seems to place in /var/named.
Is there any blessed, bestofallpossibleworlds place for the zone files.
I'm moving our DNS from from AIX to CentOS/Fedora. I'm inclined to
create the /etc/dns dir but maybe it'd be better to put it in
Up until Bill came out with NT with the stated intention of killing UNIX
I was somewhat of an M$ fan (over Apple that is). All he really
succeeded in killing was Netware. Now years later Apple is running a
UNIX based OS - go figure.
-Original Message-
From: bind-users-bounces+jlightn
My thanks to everyone that answered for their wit and wisdom, both of which are
good to find when joining a list. /var/named it is.
its UNIX fragmentation all over again. 8)
Remember when Windows NT was begun as the Great White Hope that would
have all the functionality (and more!) of Un
No the prior poster was correct - you can do chroot or SELinux or both.
While it is true that RedHat teaches SELinux and ships it you can always
disable it if you prefer not to use it. You are asked during the
install of the OS and you can disable it or enable it any time you want
after the insta
17 matches
Mail list logo
