New BIND 9 chroot directories

Doug Barton DougB at
Mon Oct 4 13:10:46 PDT 2004

On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, Jose M Rodriguez wrote:

> At last here, BETA7 come with a populated /var/named.

Yes, this is as it should be.

> we've used /var/named for ages without this layout.


> Is this really needed?

It is necessary to have a default chroot directory structure, yes. You 
can easily prevent /etc/rc.d/named from doing anything with it by adding 
named_chroot_autoupdate="NO" to your /etc/rc.conf[.local] file. You can 
also prevent mergemaster from tempting you with files in /etc/namedb by 
adding NO_BIND_ETC to /etc/make.conf. What may be necessary at this 
point is to add a knob that prevents the directory structure from being 
created in the installworld step. I'll look at that tonight.

I feel that I've provided the users plenty of knobs to customize this 
stuff with, but if folks have ideas on how it can be improved, I'm open 
to them.

> This breaks our update plans.

Well, hopefully I've demonstrated that the problems you've experienced 
can be worked around. Of course, two other options are available, one is 
to move your stuff to a different directory, and the other is to adopt 
the structure that is now being installed by default.

> Also, I think this is not well documnted on UPDATING

The entry in UPDATING says (in part):

         If you are using a custom configuration, or if you have
         customised the named_* variables in /etc/rc.conf[.local]
         then you may have to adjust the instructions accordingly.
         It is suggested that you carefully examine the new named
         variables in /etc/defaults/rc.conf and the options in
         /var/named/etc/namedb/named.conf to see if they might
         now be more suitable.

If you have suggestions on how this can be made more clear, please let 
me know.



     This .signature sanitized for your protection

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list