[Bug 263499] [NEW PORT] dns/bind918-noxml

From: <bugzilla-noreply_at_freebsd.org>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 15:12:37 UTC

Leo Vandewoestijne <freebsd@dns.company> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
                 CC|                            |freebsd@dns.company

--- Comment #5 from Leo Vandewoestijne <freebsd@dns.company> ---
(In reply to Alexey Dokuchaev from comment #4)
> Guys, this is ridiculous.  Just add the option
> ...
> The "I don't like it" reason of closing the original bug #253480 is bogus.
That was just one "argument".
The other being amount of security advisories of Bind itself:
the more security advisories, the worse the software - right?

Once ago, in 9.16 or before, I needed TUNING_LARGE, while serving large zones
(some over 20GB). It made the difference between being able to use this
software or hitting hardware limits with inefficient software. Received the
same "too many options / I don't like it". Meaning becoming unable to use Bind
unless making an own installer. It's frustrating since the ports are meant to
install software, and nice for doing so.

Anyway, I just made a patch to accomplish what was desired in #253480
Turned out to be identical with what was submitted. Testing in Poudriere
(starting from zero) costed me half a day, while having a 16 core CPU.
So, contrary... stand in the maintainers shoes for a while...
It's timeconsuming and sometimes indeed complicated.
I understand both parties arguments:
look at the dependencies: at least 142 packages by default when you start from
(of which a whole bunch that are simply ridiculous for running a DNS daemon).
Then yes, you would wish to keep things minimal.
But that's actually an argument in favor of what the reporter is asking!
(or better in plural: what reporters are asking).

Since [a] libxml2 is by default not required and [b] maintainer wish to keep
things simple, I suggest -unless selected by user- to actively prevent it -also
at dns/bind916-, using '--without-libxml2' since the default is 'auto' (not
'no' as -maybe- suggested above).

I just tested both dns/bind916 and dns/bind918 with this, and both went fine.

Creating a separate port to accomplish this, doesn't seem a wise way to me.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.