BIND chroot environment in 10-RELEASE...gone?

[George Mitchell]

On 12/03/13 17:10, Chris H wrote:
>[...]
>[Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug at nethelp.no wrote:]
>> I agree with the protesters here. Removing chroot and symlinking logic
>> in the ports is a significant disservice to FreeBSD users, and will
>> make it harder to use BIND in a sensible way. A net disincentive to
>> use FreeBSD :-(
>
> I strongly disagree. The BIND is still available within FreeBSD for anyone who chooses to
> use/install it. Further, nothing stops anyone who wishes to continue using the CHROOT(8)
> script(s) that provided the BIND with a chroot. Any copy of a FreeBSD-8 (maybe even 9)
> install CD/DVD holds all the "magic" required. It is _easily_ acquired, and implemented. In
> fact, one could easily turn the whole affair into an automated routine.
> So. Bottom line; the BIND still remains with FreeBSD, nothing has been taken away.
> The CHROOT(8) scripts are still easily available, and can be implemented, at will, by
> anyone who cares to continue using it.
> What's the big deal?
> [...]

FreeBSD 8: Install system; add named_enable="YES" to /etc/rc.conf; copy
config and zone files to /var/named/etc/namedb.

FreeBSD 10: Install system; install dns/bind9?; observe pkg-message
citing the "/etc/rc.d/named script in the base"; whoa, it isn't there!
Try to dig up chroot script from FreeBSD 8; copy config and zone files
to /var/named/usr/local/etc/namedb (I think); hope I did it all right.

What's the big deal?  Major Principle of Least Amazement violation.
-- George Mitchell