Displaying 11 results from an estimated 11 matches for "bind9_10".
Did you mean:
bind9_11
2023 Jan 16
1
Debian11 Samba backport and bind9
...stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.STDOUT,
cwd='.').communicate()[0]
bind_info = get_string(bind_info)
bind9_8 = '#'
bind9_9 = '#'
bind9_10 = '#'
bind9_11 = '#'
bind9_12 = '#'
bind9_14 = '#'
bind9_16 = '#'
bind9_18 = '#'
if bind_info.upper().find('BIND 9.8') != -1:
bind9_8 = ''
elif bind_info.upper...
2023 Jan 16
1
Debian11 Samba backport and bind9
...ut=subprocess.PIPE,
> ???????????????????????????????????? stderr=subprocess.STDOUT,
> ???????????????????????????????????? cwd='.').communicate()[0]
> ??????? bind_info = get_string(bind_info)
> ??????? bind9_8 = '#'
> ??????? bind9_9 = '#'
> ??????? bind9_10 = '#'
> ??????? bind9_11 = '#'
> ??????? bind9_12 = '#'
> ??????? bind9_14 = '#'
> ??????? bind9_16 = '#'
> ??????? bind9_18 = '#'
> ??????? if bind_info.upper().find('BIND 9.8') != -1:
> ??????????? bind9_8 = '...
2023 Jan 16
1
Debian11 Samba backport and bind9
...> ????????????????????????????????????? stderr=subprocess.STDOUT,
>> ????????????????????????????????????? cwd='.').communicate()[0]
>> ???????? bind_info = get_string(bind_info)
>> ???????? bind9_8 = '#'
>> ???????? bind9_9 = '#'
>> ???????? bind9_10 = '#'
>> ???????? bind9_11 = '#'
>> ???????? bind9_12 = '#'
>> ???????? bind9_14 = '#'
>> ???????? bind9_16 = '#'
>> ???????? bind9_18 = '#'
>> ???????? if bind_info.upper().find('BIND 9.8') != -1:
>>...
2023 Jan 16
1
Debian11 Samba backport and bind9
...??????????????????????? stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
>>> stderr=subprocess.STDOUT,
>>> cwd='.').communicate()[0]
>>> ???????? bind_info = get_string(bind_info)
>>> ???????? bind9_8 = '#'
>>> ???????? bind9_9 = '#'
>>> ???????? bind9_10 = '#'
>>> ???????? bind9_11 = '#'
>>> ???????? bind9_12 = '#'
>>> ???????? bind9_14 = '#'
>>> ???????? bind9_16 = '#'
>>> ???????? bind9_18 = '#'
>>> ???????? if bind_info.upper().find('BIND 9....
2023 Jan 16
1
Debian11 Samba backport and bind9
...stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
>>>> stderr=subprocess.STDOUT,
>>>> cwd='.').communicate()[0]
>>>> ???????? bind_info = get_string(bind_info)
>>>> ???????? bind9_8 = '#'
>>>> ???????? bind9_9 = '#'
>>>> ???????? bind9_10 = '#'
>>>> ???????? bind9_11 = '#'
>>>> ???????? bind9_12 = '#'
>>>> ???????? bind9_14 = '#'
>>>> ???????? bind9_16 = '#'
>>>> ???????? bind9_18 = '#'
>>>> ???????? if bind_info.u...
2023 Jan 16
1
Debian11 Samba backport and bind9
On 16/01/2023 16:56, Stefan Kania via samba wrote:
> Hi to all,
> Is there a known problem when using Debian 11 together with the samba
> packages from the backports (4.17.4) and the bind9 from the backports
> (9.18). With me it comes on each further Domaincontroller to errors with
> the "samba_dnsupdate --verbose --all-names".
>
> If I install Bind9 in version
2023 Jan 16
1
Debian11 Samba backport and bind9
...>>>>> stderr=subprocess.STDOUT,
>>>>> cwd='.').communicate()[0]
>>>>> ???????? bind_info = get_string(bind_info)
>>>>> ???????? bind9_8 = '#'
>>>>> ???????? bind9_9 = '#'
>>>>> ???????? bind9_10 = '#'
>>>>> ???????? bind9_11 = '#'
>>>>> ???????? bind9_12 = '#'
>>>>> ???????? bind9_14 = '#'
>>>>> ???????? bind9_16 = '#'
>>>>> ???????? bind9_18 = '#'
>>>>>...
2016 Jul 26
2
bind 9.11.b2 with samba 4.4.5
...uot;AD DNS Zone" {
# For BIND 9.8.x
# database "dlopen /usr/local/samba/lib/bind9/dlz_bind9.so";
# For BIND 9.9.x
# database "dlopen /usr/local/samba/lib/bind9/dlz_bind9_9.so";
# For BIND 9.10.x
database "dlopen /usr/local/samba/lib/bind9/dlz_bind9_10.so";
};
2016 Jul 26
0
bind 9.11.b2 with samba 4.4.5
Hi,
Did you tried to use the bind9_10 library? Did it worked?
If it does not work you should be able to replace this library (which do
not need configuration) by one shipped with your Bind package. This one
will need configuration to know how to reach and deal with AD LDAP tree and
authentication, but that should be possible...
2016-...
2020 Sep 10
1
AD-DC with DLZ using Bind9.16.x
...epending on your BIND version
#
dlz "AD DNS Zone" {
# For BIND 9.8.x
${BIND9_8} database "dlopen ${MODULESDIR}/bind9/dlz_bind9.so";
# For BIND 9.9.x
${BIND9_9} database "dlopen ${MODULESDIR}/bind9/dlz_bind9_9.so";
# For BIND 9.10.x
${BIND9_10} database "dlopen ${MODULESDIR}/bind9/dlz_bind9_10.so";
# For BIND 9.11.x
${BIND9_11} database "dlopen ${MODULESDIR}/bind9/dlz_bind9_11.so";
# For BIND 9.12.x
${BIND9_12} database "dlopen ${MODULESDIR}/bind9/dlz_bind9_12.so";
};
Carlos
2016 Aug 01
2
Bind on non-DC host (formerly: bind 9.11.b2 with samba 4.4.5)
Hi Andrew,
Sorry about that but I have to ask: why that would not be an option?
2016-08-01 8:48 GMT+02:00 Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org>:
> On Tue, 2016-07-26 at 10:34 +0200, mathias dufresne wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Did you tried to use the bind9_10 library? Did it worked?
>
> If not, the changes to the dlz_minimal.h and the code to match the .h
> from BIND are normally trivial
>
> > If it does not work you should be able to replace this library (which
> > do
> > not need configuration) by one shipped with your Bi...