Event ID source incorrect for BIND 8.2.3 NT port

[Danny Mayer]

At 07:20 PM 4/26/01, Joe Rhett wrote:

> > This turns out to be a minor problem with named-xfer stripping out the path
> > name using the Unix separator '/' character. On NT this is '\'. This has to be
> > done so that it doesn't break the Unix side. It's in common code.
>
>Since I have no NT development environment, would someone be willing to add
>this fix?

         I committed this change to the source pool right after I wrote my reply.
It will be in the next release. Sorry I wasn't clear on this.

> >> 2. Is there any reason why the BINDCtrl program isn't a Control Panel applet?
>
> > If you don't want that modify BINDInstallDlg.cpp to not install a 
> > program group.
>  
> > >Second, even if it is a command line interface there's no reason not to
> > >build a Control Panel applet to invoke it.
> > 
> >          Feel free to contribute this to the code base. 
>  
>You know, replying to me to say that someone needs to do it is about as
>useful as just plain 'yep'. In my original query I specifically asked if
>someone with an NT development environment would be willing to make these
>changes. If I could do this, I would. I have contributed changes before, I
>got the concept. I just don't have a build environment for this.
         I'm not sure I know what your point is.  I concluded that the effort is not
worth the benefit. In the NT/W2K environment, the control panel is practically
speaking for most people just another folder.  What underlies it technically to
put it there means a lot more effort.  So there has to be a VERY good reason
for doing so. Should the BINDCtrl have it's own startup folder? Maybe not, but
at least you can find it.


> > >Your questions make no sense to me. The reload button should be equivalent
> > >to "ndc reload". The restart button should be the same as "ndc restart". If
> > >you're not sure what the difference is between these functions, why are you
> > >replying?
> > 
> > I know what the difference is. The question is why do you want to restart
> > BIND instead of reloading it.  What do you gain from doing this?  Do people have
> > a hard time pressing two buttons instead of one? The underlying code would
> > have to invoke the stop command to the system service and then the start
> > command in the system service.  There's no restart system service command.
>  
>You clearly don't know what the difference is. "reload" looks for changes 
>to zone files.  "restart" dumps the cache and reloads named.conf. Two 
>very different operations.

Maybe you should stop and take a look at the signature on the readme files
in the NT installation kit before you make any further comments.

Now we are getting closer to your real problem.  What you want to do is to
clear the cache and maybe reload the configuration and zone data. Maybe you
should be explaining the benefit you see to clearing the cache.  Maybe what
you really want is a "Clear Cache" button.  So what's the benefit of doing this
apart from the obvious one of reducing memory consumption? That's what I
really want to understand.

As I said before, the Win32 System Services have no restart function. The ONLY
way to do this is to issue two commands to the Win32 Services, the first to stop
the service and the second to start it. So why bother to create another button?


> >          If your goal is to reduce memory BIND's memory consumption, you're
> > on the wrong track.  BIND caches information in memory about previous queries
> > so reduce the need to rerequest an answer that it's already received.
>
>Where did that come from? This is the 'workers' list. We all understand the
>idea of a cache. Can you stop the 'dumb boy' responses?

         Yet you want to clear the cache without giving any reason why. It may
be obvious to you, yet there is no clear cache command on Unix either. If there's
no reason FOR doing something why would you want this on NT?

>Sorry if it wasn't clear - I figured I didn't have to cover the obvious on
>the workers list. I know everything that BIND is capable of, I know how to
>configure it. I'm asking if someone is willing to produce patches to
>resolve issues in the current config.
If I know what the issues are that you are trying to resolve, maybe I can come
up with a reasonable solution. I don't know of anyone else doing active work
on BIND 8 on NT, so if you need real help, explain the issues and the problems.
Making nasty comments about people doesn't solve anything, especially when
they're unjustified.

                 Danny