On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 16:59 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 15:47 -0700, Craig White wrote:
probably a bugzilla entry to upstream provider to maybe create an 'artificial' conflict between the 2 packages so that you can't install both accidentally.
caching-nameserver is just the config files ... it requires bind to be installed too
---- given the fact that the result of an update breaks working configurations and avoiding that situation is one of the targets of the upstream provider, the upstream provider probably should invest a little bit of time/energy to ensure that this is unlikely to occur.
Given there are idiot admins like me who rarely miss an opportunity to step on their d*cks...(I think I only got caught on this once but never knew until now, why that was the case).
Craig