trigger point for new bug

Michael McNally mcnally at
Wed Nov 16 22:35:27 UTC 2011

On 11/16/11 1:22 PM, michoski wrote:

> Short time ago I grabbed the latest tarball from your download site, and
> generated internal packages.  I could have sworn that was 9.8.1-P4 (our
> internal packages still have the P4, and Google finds some hits):

Perhaps it was 9.8.0-P4?  Many of our version names bear a very close
resemblance to one another.

> PROD:1 mhoskins at adns1:~$ rpm -qa | grep bind
> bind98-utils-9.8.1-1.P4
> bind98-libs-9.8.1-1.P4
> bind98-chroot-9.8.1-1.P4
> bind98-9.8.1-1.P4
> ...which led to mass confusion on how/why "P1" is newer than "P4" -- or if I
> somehow entered a magic time warp.  Were "P4" packages posted for some
> window of time that were later removed?

No.  You can see all versions of ISC BIND 9 that we have released,
going back to 9.0.0 in 2004, at
There has never (yet) been a 9.8.1-P4 released by ISC.

However, the rpm names you are seeing are assigned by another
entity, probably the maintainer of whatever repository you are
using (e.g. RedHat.)  Repository maintainers have been known
to use version numbers similar, but not identical, to those
assigned by ISC.

> No worries, I will move to P1 given today's date on the tarball.  :-)

That's our recommendation.

Michael McNally
ISC Support

More information about the bind-users mailing list