freebsd port update?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

freebsd port update?

Anti-2

is the freebsd port going to be updated soon? still on version 2.9.4
and i need ldap... also the recursor can build on freebsd 5, would
be nice if the port checked the os version and built it when
applicable...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: freebsd port update?

Brad Knowles-4
At 5:26 PM -0600 2003/03/13, Anti wrote:

>  is the freebsd port going to be updated soon? still on version 2.9.4
>  and i need ldap... also the recursor can build on freebsd 5, would
>  be nice if the port checked the os version and built it when
>  applicable...

        You need to talk to the port maintainer.

--
Brad Knowles, <[hidden email]>

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
     -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.

GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+
!w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: freebsd port update?

Dirk Meyer-2
In reply to this post by Anti-2
Hi,

> is the freebsd port going to be updated soon? still on version 2.9.4
> and i need ldap... also the recursor can build on freebsd 5, would
> be nice if the port checked the os version and built it when
> applicable...

We are in a ports freeze, so no update can be committed right now..

For a preview you can get:
http://people.freebsd.org/~dinoex/ports/powerdns/

CC me if needed, as I am not subsribed to the list.

kind regards Dirk

- Dirk Meyer, Im Grund 4, 34317 Habichtswald, Germany
- [[hidden email]],[[hidden email]],[[hidden email]]

Preview port has this changes:
- Update to 2.9.6
- make ports work as a master port
- add suppoort for LDAP, submitted by [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: freebsd port update?

Richard Arends
In reply to this post by Anti-2
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Anti wrote:

Hello,

> is the freebsd port going to be updated soon? still on version 2.9.4 and
> i need ldap... also the recursor can build on freebsd 5, would be nice
> if the port checked the os version and built it when applicable...

Dirk and I are currently working on the new version of powerdns. Because
off the ports tree freeze, it will take some time before it will included,
but eventualy it will :)

If you really can't wait, take a look at
http://people.freebsd.org/~dinoex/ports/powerdns/ that's the newest
version, which is not committed yet.

Regards,

Richard.

----
Paul Vixie in an interview with Sendmail.net:

Now that the Internet has the full spectrum of humanity as users,
the technology is showing its weakness: it was designed to be
used by friendly, smart people. Spammers, as an example of a class,
are neither friendly nor smart.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[OT] Oh, the irony... (Was Re: freebsd port update?)

Ian R. Justman

Richard Arends wrote:

*snip!*

> ----
> Paul Vixie in an interview with Sendmail.net:
>
> Now that the Internet has the full spectrum of humanity as users,
> the technology is showing its weakness: it was designed to be
> used by friendly, smart people. Spammers, as an example of a class,
> are neither friendly nor smart.

Love the sig.  :)

While Vixie has a valid point, if I might add with a bit of well-deserved
biting sarcasm:

It's thanks to folks like BIND's Vixie and Sendmail's Eric Allman (as
represented above with the sendmail.net domain) who never designed BIND nor
Sendmail with security in mind, the Internet was made a safe haven for
those very people who are neither friendly nor smart in the first place.

Seriously, while major strides have been made, I'm still not completely
convinced that their respective packages are all that much safer as
evidenced by recent issues found in Sendmail and BIND (and much worse, the
ISS's and the ISC's handling of the three serious bugs found in BIND 4 and
8 back in October/November.

Which is why I use alternative packages, such as PowerDNS, so I don't have
to put up with stuff like that.

--Ian.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OT] Oh, the irony... (Was Re: freebsd port update?)

Brad Knowles-4
At 1:29 AM -0800 2003/03/14, Ian R. Justman wrote:

>  Seriously, while major strides have been made, I'm still not
>  completely convinced that their respective packages are all that
>  much safer as evidenced by recent issues found in Sendmail and
>  BIND (and much worse, the ISS's and the ISC's handling of the
>  three serious bugs found in BIND 4 and 8 back in October/November.

        How many duodecillions of packets have been handled over the past
twenty or thirty years by PowerDNS?  There are no two packages more
intensely scrutinized throughout the entire history of the Internet,
than BIND & sendmail.  The fact that they are still finding bugs
means that they have scraped further down the barrel for these two
programs than for any others, but that they have not yet reached the
bottom.  How far beneath the surface do you think they've gotten with
alternative programs, such as PowerDNS?

        People are not perfect.  Nothing that is created by people is
perfect.  Through trial-by-fire and other methods, these two programs
have stood the test of time, and while not perfect, are a damn site
better than almost any other.


        This is not to say that PowerDNS does not have it's place, and
that for some sites it may be a better choice than BIND, or that they
might have alternatives to sendmail that would be better choices for
them.

        But don't casually dismiss either BIND or sendmail just because
of recent security issues that have been discovered.


        When the programs you've written have stood the test of time over
twenty or thirty years, have had the sum total of all the hackers and
crackers on the Internet actively trying to find weaknesses, and are
still kicking around as the choice for providing that kind of
service, then you've got legitimate grounds to propose that your
program is better overall.

        But not until then.

--
Brad Knowles, <[hidden email]>

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
     -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.

GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+
!w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)