More RedHat ickyness... maybe

[Mike Bilow]

Soup Master wrote in a message to Mike Bilow:

 SM> I think I've finally settled on a working DNS server
 SM> configuration for home.  However, I once again blew several
 SM> hours mucking around with /etc/named.boot not realizing that
 SM> I had to run it through a filter to generate /etc/named.conf
 SM> (/usr/doc/bind-???????/named-bootconf.pl). 

 SM> I will concede that this is probably just a newer `named`
 SM> convention and I need to catch up with the times, but I am
 SM> in a mode to blame RedHat and their retarded
 SM> /etc/rc.d/init.d tricks to auto configure things for me.

 SM> Will any BIND experts please step forward to offer a comment
 SM> on the newer named.conf configuration file.

It is not usual to have to reprocess named.boot into named.conf.  What happened
is that the named.boot file format was retired after v4, and the named.conf
format was introduced as of v8.  (There is no v5, v6, or v7.)  Conversion
scripts were provided for those migrating from v4 to v8, but this is intended
to be a one-time-only migration after which the named.conf file is maintained
manually.  Among other issues, many of the new features in v8 have no analog in
v4 and therefore cannot be represented in the migration process.

Another unpleasant factor is that the definitive reference, O'Reilly's "DNS and
BIND," covers only v4 through its second edition, and you need the third
edition for coverage of v8.

If I can help further, drop me a note.

 SM> BTW, I'm planning to host March's BLU meeting to talk about
 SM> SAMBA. Any early questions which I can prepare for?  I'd
 SM> like to demo samba-2.x on Linux with a Win95 laptop (do we
 SM> need printers?)

This sounds really interesting.
 
-- Mike


-
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).