Time to stop buildling named (and friends) by default in 6-current?

[Scott Long]

John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 March 2005 05:27 am, Doug Barton wrote:
> 
>>Folks,
>>
>>Way back at the bsdcon in Foster City when we first started talking about
>>importing BIND 9 into the base we also talked about adding more knobs to
>>give users finer grained control over which bits of BIND were built, and
>>turning off the build of named (and associated binaries) by default. Well,
>>the first bit is done, so we're now in the position of being able to flip
>>the NO_BIND_NAMED knob (see make.conf(5) for details) to WITH_BIND_NAMED,
>>and turn it off by default. Is this something that we're still interested
>>in doing? If so, this would be a good time to do it, since I'll be
>>importing 9.3.1 sometime in the next couple days (first round of make world
>>testing is underway), and we're still early in the life of 6-current.
>>
>>Of course, this would only be for 6-current, we wouldn't change the
>>behavior in RELENG_[45].
>>
>>What do you think?
> 
> 
> If we are going to do this, then why not just have users install bind from 
> ports and only install the client as part of the base system?  This is what 
> we do with DHCP for example.  Basically, if it's going to be an optional 
> component, I think it belongs in ports, not the /usr/src.
> 

I agree here, though maybe the argument is moot now that Doug imported
9.3.1 last night?  Not changing the status quo is ok too.


Scott