Re: Dents v0.0.3 - DNS server

1999-05-10 Thread Marco d'Itri
On May 10, Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I suppose it would be possible, but I'm not particularly interested in >maintaining more than one version. A better solution would be to figure out We can't not have a package like BIND in our distribution. If you need some hints about sett

Re: Dents v0.0.3 - DNS server

1999-05-10 Thread Joel Klecker
At 18:16 -0600 1999-05-09, Bdale Garbee wrote: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: I wonder if s/o is already working on this or if it doesn't make sense to package it. Given the BIND package will move to non-free in version 8.2 due to the license on the RSA code used for DNSSEC, it's good t

Re: Dents v0.0.3 - DNS server

1999-05-10 Thread Bdale Garbee
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: >> Given the BIND package will move to non-free in version 8.2 due to >> the license on the RSA code used for DNSSEC, it's good to see an >> alternative that will be in main... even if it's less functional. > Is it possible to keep an older version of Bin

Re: Dents v0.0.3 - DNS server

1999-05-10 Thread Craig Brozefsky
Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > I wonder if s/o is already working on this or if it doesn't make sense > > to package it. > Given the BIND package will move to non-free in version 8.2 due to > the license on the RSA code used for DNSSEC, it

Re: Dents v0.0.3 - DNS server

1999-05-10 Thread Bdale Garbee
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > I wonder if s/o is already working on this or if it doesn't make sense > to package it. Given the BIND package will move to non-free in version 8.2 due to the license on the RSA code used for DNSSEC, it's good to see an alternative that will be in main..