On Wed, January 12, 2005 8:02 am, Johnny Hughes said: > > On Wed, January 12, 2005 7:51 am, Lance Davis said: >> On Wed, 12 Jan 2005, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> >>> > This is an upstream issue ... AND ... according to redhat, you >>> shouldn't >>> > have caching-nameserver installed on a DNS server that is anything >>> other >>> > than a caching-nameserver :). It is indeed the caching-nameserver >>> package >>> > that is causing the issue. >>> > >>> >>> As further clarification, I point exactly to the post: >>> >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=143558#c9 >>> >>> I think you should put the new caching-nameserver back into the U4 >>> directories ... this will happen anytime redhat issues an update to >>> caching-nameserver and is exactly by design. >>> >>> If you have DNS zones, remove caching-nameserver from that box...it is >>> not >>> a caching-nameserver any longer >> >> Well I am also going by a post from parsley to the tao mailing list :- >> >> http://mailman.taolinux.org/pipermail/tao-i386/2005-January/000104.html >> >> I dont think it is right for it to kill a working nameserver on an >> update, >> whether or not people have it installed by mistake - ie if it is already >> installed and the config files have been changd and the thing is >> running, >> they should not be removed and the thing stopped - IMHO >> >> Lance >> >> -- > I agree, _BUT_ the guy at RedHat is right ... The purpose of > caching-nameserver is to setup a "caching-only-DNS" box ... the only way > to setup a "caching-only-DNS" box is to remove the current named.conf file > and replace it with a new one that defines it as a "caching-only-DNS" box > :) > > The lesson learned is ... once you setup your box as a DNS zone control > box, backup the named.conf file and remove the package caching-nameserver > ... OR ... don't install it in the first place. > > My guide has been updated to remove the caching-nameserver package after > finishing zone setup :). Since RedHat is probably not going to change the behavior of the caching-nameserver package...what do you want to do with that package now? The options are: (1) put it back as is ... this is an upstream issue (and put an entry about not using caching-nameserver on DNS Zone controller boxes in the FAQ). (2) File a bug report against caching-nameserver at RedHat and see what they say, leaving the current caching-nameserver update in testing. (3) Change the package specfile so that it behaves the way we think it should. Personally, I think we should do #1 ... or maybe #2, which will probably be result in RedHat saying "Don't use caching-nameserver on a DNS Zone controller box" ... which they already said in the comment that I pointed to. That would leave us with options #1 and #3 ... Thanks, Johnny Hughes