[CentOS] Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?

Larry Vaden

vaden at texoma.net
Wed Feb 2 17:22:12 UTC 2011


Hello CentOS Community Members,

What is RH's be-all end-all justification for staying with an ancient
code base for such important programs as BIND et al?

A similar problem (to BZ561299) was first reported five (5) years ago
on the isc.org mailing list.

Is there any support among the CentOS community for a REPO of current
vintage for such important functions as BIND et al?

That question is based on the presumption that time is taking us to a
more complete and correct implementation of the basic functions like
DNS.

IOW, is CentOS philosophy of tracking RH so nailed-to-the-wall that it
is blasphemy to propose a REPO of current editions of certain very
important functions?

kind regards/ldv

A quote from a long term mentor now at Internet2:

"It's fundamentally wrong for RedHat to attempt to backport security patches
for such a fundamental service. I'd cuss a blue streak about this point, in
fact, except that I don't want to trigger the anti-cuss features at
Dr. Vaughn's place of employment."

===

Reported:	2010-02-03 05:32 EST by Duncan (see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561299):

Additional info:

Works fine in Fedora 4,8,9 and 11, Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES release 4
release 4 (Nahant Update 8) and Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.1
(Tikanga)

Fails in 5.4 and Fedora 10.



More information about the CentOS mailing list