From RHEL to CentOS BIND 9

Alan Clegg Alan_Clegg at
Wed Dec 5 21:07:59 UTC 2007

> Again, maybe the folks who put these RPM's and installers together should make 
> SURE that these things work.

Agreed.  They should write the code to the consumer's needs.

> I can't count how many times I've been told IM WRONG today alone when the 
> installer should have done all of these things FOR ME. I should have been 
> working on my configurations minutes after installing. This is not a ME 
> problem even if I am not truly well versed in installing a chrooted bind 
> server. Let's get it right so that we can fix these problems and see MANY more 
> using OS over being too nervous to use it.

The ISC method of:

    ./configure; make; make install; {create configuration}; {run}

continues to work fine for many people, making few "too nervous to use it".

The need to understand the {create configuration} step and the
configuration's interaction with the {run} step is the complex part that
the creators of the RPMs and other install packages (including the *BSD
ports/packages, etc) are trying to keep their user away from.

You have run into an issue that is really outside the scope of BIND and
more in the scope of, as you noted, your installer package (RPM) that is
externally supported.  Aside from Adam who had input earlier in the
thread (and is, I'm sure, still reading), I'm not aware of anyone on the
list that actually creates/supports the RPMs.

To help advance the open source agenda as you mentioned in other posts,
you should contact your operating system vendor and/or RPM supplier and
voice your concerns and provide input regarding the RPMs that you are
having trouble with.

If you are able to put together a good SELinux FAQ, I'll be more than
happy to make sure that it makes it into the ISC FAQ to which you were
pointed earlier.

Have a great afternoon,

More information about the bind-users mailing list