[Centos] bind and 3.4

[Michael Jennings]

On Wednesday, 12 January 2005, at 17:19:03 (+0000),
Lance Davis wrote:

> I agree totally - but disagree that an 'upgrade' should trash files
> that you have edited, and remove your configuration just because you
> have something installed that you shouldnt.

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.

We can argue about %config vs. %config(noreplace) till the cows come
home, but the bottom line is that the decision isn't ours, and it has
already been made.  Those who wish to debate the decision are free to
post comments on the RH bug.  Barring a change of heart from RedHat,
this matter should be closed.  (And I am definitely opposed to
changing this package in CentOS; for better or worse, we stay close to
the Mother Ship.)

Michael

-- 
Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX)  http://www.kainx.org/  <mej at kainx.org>
n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/       Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 "I long for the warmth of days gone by, when you were mine, but now
  those days are memories in time.  Life's empty without you by my
  side.  My heart belongs to you no matter what I try."
                          -- Boyz II Men, "Four Seasons of Loneliness"