On 07/13/2011 12:15 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On 7/13/2011 1:50 PM, John Hinton wrote:
But my use cases are related to a prodduction environment, maintaining several hundred zone files, with lots of adds, changes, and deletes. The s-c-bind GUI tool was useless, compared to TUI edits (certain legacy systems) and scripts to do the backups, accuracy audit, and creation of all files including the PTR record files
So, aren't computer programs supposed to be able to deal with complicated cases, or just not free computer programs? Or is the input syntax just too weird? While s-c-bind may not have been the right answer, it just seems odd as a missing piece in the distribution and epel-provided packages. Almost as odd as not having a network-aware authentication mechanism working as a server out of the box on your initial install - as though it would be unusual to have more than one computer and want those initial users to be able to log into the others you'd add later.
I would have to guess that UpStream decided it was not to be. They most likely had very good reasons for this. I 'barely' looked at it as it could not do what I need to do and that was some years back. Is/Was it capable of doing IPV6? That would be a good reason to put it to bed... given IPV6 will likely become widespread during the lifespan of CentOS 6. Various SPF/SenderID/DomainKeys things also ride on bind these days. It could be that UpStream decided that was a good reason to put it to bed? Either way, CentOS is a nearly exact clone of UpStream, so really you need to go complain at UpStream, not on this list. CentOS has exactly matched their goal of providing the same packages available under UpStream. There is no point to complaining here.
It's not so much a complaint and certainly not directed at CentOS, as pointing out a curious situation that pretty much everyone has to work around. Russ may be of the opinion that everyone should memorize bazillion-page books of details about each quirky service or hire someone who did, but I think the point of using computers should be to make things easier. And I'm surprised that there isn't a common tool to make it easy at least in the usual 3rd party repos.
Yes, certainly NOT a complaint with CentOS. system-config-bind was a very useful too for us. It wasn't perfect and there were a few features it could have benefited from, but it did a good enough job for we needed it to do.
I had been thinking recently that we needed to start looking for a different way to manage the DNS servers on our gateways, and had even begun to build initial bind configuration for production systems into the configuration scripts. I guess I am unhappy because someone else made the decision about when to stop using system-config-bind for me :-) And for no good reason that I can figure.