Zitat von Andrew Savchenko <[email protected]>:
Hello,
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:45:27 +0200 [email protected] wrote:
May i ask if it is really needed to exclude ldns from tarball? It was
really handy to not download yet-another-tarball have a look at the
checksums and move it to the right destination, than do configure/make
for the libs and start over with unbound again. How many people
actually need it to be excluded?
This is a standard Unix-way to split projects into small, reusable and
replaceable pieces. As a Gentoo user I highly appreciate that bundled
package was removed from the tarball. This is a Gentoo policy to
use system libraries instead of bundled libs whenever possible, and
this is the very good policy I must say: this way system is kept
up-to-date for all affected applications.
I fully agree from a package point of view, but it was only *optional*
to build unbound with builtin ldns. If there are system-wide ldns
libraries it was also easy to use them. It was even the default to do
so, no?
So what kind of problem is solved by making it harder to manage
unbound installed from source? Is it a real problem if some other
tools are linked against another version of ldns?
Either way i think we really reached a dead end here so i take it as
it is and will have a look if it is still worth the effort to compile
from source.
Regards
Andreas
_______________________________________________
Unbound-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://unbound.nlnetlabs.nl/mailman/listinfo/unbound-users
