> Sorry - I once was sold on the idea of djb's tools and Qmail, and I've> regretted installing it ever since. Save yourself some serious agony -run> (don't walk!) away from djb-ANYTHING!I don't know what problems you had with it, but I'm hapilly using it on about 20 servers (both djbdns and qmail) and never had a problem with it. I'll remember your advice when I'll encounter my first problem, though I may just as well read the docs again when that happens... :) --- I second the djb comment, the guy is an arrogant prick; if something doesn't compile on your server he thinks its your fault. (i.e. back when he was linking all of his software to the wrong error.h and you had to mod it to get it to compile). Not only is it not written that well; but qmail for example. You have to install another piece of software to control relay, and it is totally non intuitive in any way. As far as tinydns the idea of having to install a "control daemon" to run his software is kind of ridiculous to me. Bind really couldn't be any easier to use, and it works every time. -Drew
U n d e r a c h i e v e r
2006-Jan-31 19:09 UTC
[CentOS] Re: [Offtopic] tinydns -some help needed
On 28/1/06 16:37, in article B9ECBF8D89E7684EB63FF250E8788B1920447B at BIGLOG.thenap.com, "Drew Weaver" <drew.weaver at thenap.com> wrote:> > Bind really couldn't be any easier to use, and it works every > time.Bind zone files are an accident waiting to happen. I don't know anyone who uses it who hasn't screwed up the serial number at least once. djb data files are far simpler, and less likely to go completely horribly wrong if you fat finger something. -- takeme2your at rocketmail.com U n d e r a c h i e v e r
Possibly Parallel Threads
- Intel 965 howto Was: Easy upgrade path from beta5 to stable 5?
- Intel 965 howto Was: Easy upgrade path from beta5 to stable 5?
- tinydns/djbdns opinion poll
- SOLVED dnscache in front of samba4 internal dns (was: Re: Samba internal DNS + 2nd DNS)
- tinydns exceeds "holdoff time" on startup under CentOS 7