On Sat, 5 Jun 2021, Reindl Harald wrote:
besides that - i didn't hear a serious reasoning for a native named
binary on windows these days and given there are tons of ways running a
linux binary compared to 20 years ago i call it a waste of time
* more complex code implies more errors
some
Am 05.06.21 um 19:15 schrieb Ondřej Surý:
Folks, I would appreciate if we can say on the topic. Specifically, I consider
this rhetorical discussion on the meaning of the word “portable” neither useful
to the subscribers of this list nor productive.
besides that - i didn't hear a serious
Folks, I would appreciate if we can say on the topic. Specifically, I consider
this rhetorical discussion on the meaning of the word “portable” neither useful
to the subscribers of this list nor productive.
Thanks,
--
Ondřej Surý — ISC (He/Him)
My working hours and your working hours may be
On Fri, 4 Jun 2021 13:58:40 -0700
Gregory Sloop wrote:
> This feels a lot like responding to trolls, but I'll instead assume that
> you're asking (or making a point) in good faith.
>
> So, we'll stipulate that - you're actually interested in truth and knowledge.
>
> So, it's easily compiled
> Peter,
>
>
> do you seriously think that this word play is going to help the BIND 9
> support for Windows? So, I am asking you, what’s your serious
> proposal what should we do?
>
You may regard it as a word play but I am being very serious indeed.
I have looked high up and low down for a
Hi Eric,
When I initially looked at this I was using “rndc reload” whenever changing the
the cert. Artem Boldariev (Lead Developer for DoH at the ISC) suggested that
actually “rndc reconfig” would be the better way to do this since we only need
named to re-read the config file, we *do not*
6 matches
Mail list logo
