Hi, [Cc'ing Timo, Ondrej]
On Sat, Jan 07, 2023 at 04:39:34PM -0000, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > Santiago Vila <[email protected]> wrote: > > El 23/9/22 a las 10:21, Timo Aaltonen escribió: > >> Paul Gevers kirjoitti 22.9.2022 klo 22.26: > >>> So, Timo, is the package in bullseye broken with the security update and > >>> does it need a fix, or is it fine? > >> > >> It needs a rebuild, [...] > > > > I think it's really broken: > > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1027825 > > Note that bind-dyndb-ldap currently also fails to build in unstable > since the latest bind9 release, see > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1027094 > > It is currently preventing bind9 9.18.10-2 from migrating to unstable > (that fixes a couple of bugs), and bind9 security updates were already > following the upstream branch in bullseye (as seen above). > > I'm not entirely familiar with how upstream operates on this, but as far > as I understand > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1014503 there is no > API guarantee whatsoever and bind-dyndb-ldap is the only out-of-tree > dyndb plugin ever created. as bind-dyndb-ldap would be removed on 25th of january, which then should unblock the bind9 situation for unstable/bookworm AFAIU, should we ask for removal already earlier? Should it be kept at all, is it used? (popcon seems quite low, but that is not necessarily reflecting). Regards, Salvatore
