Re: bind9-chroot again

2002-01-14 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.15.0305 +0100]: > I vote yes for the Debconfy bit. I chroot it by hand, and I find it > insanely nifty, even though bind9 isn't plagued by the same security > problems bind is. Helps me sleep better at night, or something. okay. what's your st

Re: bind9-chroot again

2002-01-14 Thread Daniel Stone
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 02:04:54AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > remember: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/debian-devel-200109/msg01393.html > > well, i have just installed a couple of bind9, and i am *tired* of > chrooting them by hand. can we please have a final vote on whether > c

bind9-chroot again

2002-01-14 Thread martin f krafft
remember: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/debian-devel-200109/msg01393.html well, i have just installed a couple of bind9, and i am *tired* of chrooting them by hand. can we please have a final vote on whether chrooting bind should be a debconf option of the bind9 package, or whether i c