DHCP server in base
krad
kraduk at gmail.com
Sat Sep 25 21:19:59 UTC 2010
On 25 September 2010 21:10, Darren Pilgrim <freebsd at bitfreak.org> wrote:
> M. Warner Losh wrote:
>
>> It would be very convenient to have this particular thing in the base, and
>> we shouldn't be too dogmatic about never having any new 3rd
>> party things in the base.
>>
>
> Please no, don't add optional servers to the base. I already don't like
> sendmail, bind, ntpd and inetd in the base. These are *optional*
> software--not required for the normal operation of the OS. They aren't
> even enabled by default except sendmail. Adding sendmail_enable="NONE"
> to /etc/rc.conf is one of the first things I do on all new systems. I
> only barely tolerate openssl in the base because it's needed for
> openssh; however, I'd rather both of those be in ports as well.
>
> There's also the issue of updating:
>
> It's very annoying to have to update the OS just to fix a BIND or
> OpenSSL vulnerability and, let's be honest, we'll likely never see the
> last of those. Rebooting a production server is non-trivial. By-hand
> partial installworlds on live systems are a disturbing prospect. If it
> was a port, just update the port. Its far easier justifying updating a
> port than modifying the OS on a production server. The Ports System
> makes updating a port so fast and painless I can do many of the
> non-user-facing ones without an announced downtime.
>
> It's trivial installing ports and utterly so installing packages. I'd
> love to see us use the awesomeness that is the Ports System to manage
> these things.
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>
have a look at man src.conf and named_program
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list