Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 22:12:19 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Can you please upload a fixed package soon, TIA.
>>
> Is this really considered RC by the release team?
I just downgraded for a reason...
Cheers
Luk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-re
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 22:12:19 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Hi
>
> Can you please upload a fixed package soon, TIA.
>
Is this really considered RC by the release team?
Cheers,
Julien
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troubl
Hi
Can you please upload a fixed package soon, TIA.
Cheers
Luk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:05:00AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> i've already mentioned bug #453765.
And interestingly, all of the code added when that was closed is still
there. And the commit log really tells the story - upgrading BIND9 from
something older than 1:9.5.0.dfsg-2
Leave named
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 06:00:11PM -0600, LaMont Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 07:47:59AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > i'm talking about a network being disrupted, not a single host. the
> > hosts DON'T have 127.0.0.1 in resolv.conf, they have the namesever.
>
> I've gone back as far as
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 07:47:59AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> i'm talking about a network being disrupted, not a single host.
> the hosts DON'T have 127.0.0.1 in resolv.conf, they have the namesever.
I've gone back as far as 9.2.4, and haven't found anywhere that the
bind9 package actually kept
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 12:33:56AM +0200, Ond??ej Surý wrote:
> While I don't exactly share LaMont's reasoning on this bug (LaMont:
> even if you do upgrade daemons separately, underlying libraries will
> change anyway while the daemon is running, so you need another restart
> anyway when libraries
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 23:47, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 01:56:18PM +0200, Ond??ej Surý wrote:
>> > a working nameserver is a core, essential component of a functioning
>> > network. while named is down, *everything* on the network that uses that
>> > nameserver ceases to funct
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 01:56:18PM +0200, Ond??ej Surý wrote:
> > a working nameserver is a core, essential component of a functioning
> > network. while named is down, *everything* on the network that uses that
> > nameserver ceases to function correctly.
>
> That's why you should never have only
> a working nameserver is a core, essential component of a functioning
> network. while named is down, *everything* on the network that uses that
> nameserver ceases to function correctly.
That's why you should never have only one "nameserver 127.0.0.1" in
your /etc/resolv.conf. Configure one or t
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 10:35:13PM -0600, LaMont Jones wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 10:47:16AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > when upgrading bind9, named is stopped until the upgrade is completed.
>
> And there is no real way to make sure it stays working while the
> libraries and such are c
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 10:47:16AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> when upgrading bind9, named is stopped until the upgrade is completed.
And there is no real way to make sure it stays working while the
libraries and such are changed out from under it, based on some of the
issues we ran into earlie
Package: bind9
Version: 1:9.6.1.dfsg.P1-3
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks unrelated software
when upgrading bind9, named is stopped until the upgrade is completed.
this could be a LONG time during an apt-get {dist-,dselect-,}upgrade,
especially if there are many packaged being upgraded
13 matches
Mail list logo
