[1835] in linux-security and linux-alert archive
[linux-security] Re: Named update for RH 4.2 exploitable?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Hicks)
Sun Jun 7 12:20:42 1998
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 12:06:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Christopher Hicks <chicks@chicks.net>
To: linux-security@redhat.com
cc: "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@wittsend.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.980606185125.4550B-100000@gargoyle>
Resent-From: linux-security@redhat.com
Reply-To: linux-security@redhat.com
On Sat, 6 Jun 1998, Paul D. Robertson wrote:
> The other major factor in sticking with BIND4 is the ability to use a
> database backend, which is important for some sites, and doesn't look to
> be easily done on the BIND8 sources according to the maintainers of such
> packages.
I have had no trouble getting my database to work with BIND8. It was
certainly easier than the same hacks to BIND4. NOTIFY is pretty easy to
code and provides a much cleaner interface between the database and BIND
than the hacks into BIND4. I've upgrade through several iterations of
BIND8 without difficulty. This is a lot easier than having to muck with
Makefiles and patches every time there's a bug or hole in BIND.
</chris>
--
It is bad luck to be superstitious. -Andrew Mathis
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Please refer to the information about this list as well as general
information about Linux security at http://www.aoy.com/Linux/Security.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe:
mail -s unsubscribe linux-security-request@redhat.com < /dev/null
