> "Petr" == Petr Cech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Petr> On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 10:48:47AM +1100 , Brian May wrote:
>> I have to wonder if it is really worth having a different name
>> for the newer package version. Are the versions really that
>> different? Personally, I woul
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 10:48:47AM +1100 , Brian May wrote:
> I have to wonder if it is really worth having a different name for the
> newer package version. Are the versions really that different?
> Personally, I would prefer to have apt-get automatically upgrade the
> package, and that will be di
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 10:48:47AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> I have to wonder if it is really worth having a different name for the
> newer package version. Are the versions really that different?
> Personally, I would prefer to have apt-get automatically upgrade the
> package, and that will be dis
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 10:48:47AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> >> bind9-lib (?) - shared libraries ? these may just end up in
> >> package bind9, I'm still working on the details
> >>
> >> bind9-dev - static libraries and include files
>
> Josip> Those two should be named libb
> "Josip" == Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Josip> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:58:51PM -0700, Bdale Garbee
Josip> wrote:
>> bind9-lib (?) - shared libraries ? these may just end up in
>> package bind9, I'm still working on the details
>>
>> bind9-dev - static
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:58:51PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> bind9-lib (?) - shared libraries ? these may just
> end up in package bind9, I'm still
> working on the details
>
>
...and bind9 is going to be run as non-root by default, right? :)
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:58:51PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote:
>
> BIND 9 source package in non-US because it's DFSG-free but has crypto
> code, including only BIND, producing binary packages
>
> bind9
Bdale Garbee wrote:
> Getting this right has two major components that are worth my commenting on
> here. First, the package 'bind' will continue to be 8.X to avoid violating
> the principle of least astonishment for our users, and there will be a new
> 'bind9' package and friends delivering 9.X.
It was just pointed out to me that there is a new RFP for bind9 packages
filed to the wnpp part of the BTS.
As the BIND package maintainer, I indicated many months ago my intention to
package BIND 9.X for Debian.
Unfortunately, the BIND 9.0.0 and 9.0.1 releases contained sources for
required
9 matches
Mail list logo
