[Centos] bind and 3.4

[Ed Clarke]

Lance Davis wrote:

>On Wed, 12 Jan 2005, Michael Jennings wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Nobody's files got "trashed."  They were renamed for backup purposes.
>>
>>Think about it:  If you're running a cache-only nameserver, there's
>>nothing you could or should reasonably do to named.conf or any of the
>>/var/named/* files.  RedHat wants to make sure that the old-and-busted
>>cache data is replaced by the new-hotness cache data, so they backup
>>your old stuff and install their new stuff.  This is a perfectly sane,
>>reasonable, and expected course of action.
>>    
>>
>
>Yes - but the people who have edited the files are not running cache-only 
>nameservers - they have mistakenly got that rpm installed and then edited 
>their stuff.
>
>If they were running cache-only nameservers then there would not be a 
>problem.
>
>Lance
>  
>
Ah... no, that didn't happen here.  The only machine that was hit by 
this "user error"/BUG was one that
I had built from the Centos 3.3 ISO disks from scratch.  The machines 
that I had upgraded from RH 9
did NOT have this problem.  All the upgraded machines are running 
Webmin/Usermin/Vitrualmin and
have non-caching nameservers running.

If I had paid more attention to the installation and not specified the 
"Caching Nameserver" then I would
not have seen this "problem".  While I'd like to blame someone else, it 
was my mistake that caused the
problems here.  The machine that I built from scratch is the master 
nameserver for everything else...