Evgeni Golov wrote:
> Hi,
>
There is a fixed package awaiting sponsoring.
Sent to -mentors more than a week ago, with no responses so far.
It also includes some needed enhancements / updates.
> I have looked at the issue, and it seems that the bind9 dependency is
> useless. We can start before bind9 (or with no bind9 at all on the host,
> and a remote bind9 with fetched logs, even if that sounds like a
> strange configuration) and nothing should prevent us from working
> correctly.
>
Indeed that would be a "less than minimally" common situation, but
supported.
> Jose, can you say anything about the dependency? Why was it added?
>
In order to avoid starting without a bind9 working.
> I'd drop it from the LSB header...
>
It has been downgraded, AFAICR
> (The other solution would be to promote bind9 from recommends to
> depends, which sounds crude to me).
>
bind9 is of course not really a dependency.
Regards,
J.L.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
