Maintained by: NLnet Labs

[Unbound-users] Unbound release 1.4.12

lst_hoe02 at kwsoft.de
Mon Jul 18 17:54:12 CEST 2011


Zitat von Paul Wouters <paul at xelerance.com>:

> On Mon, 18 Jul 2011, lst_hoe02 at kwsoft.de wrote:
>
>> May i ask if it is really needed to exclude ldns from tarball? It  
>> was really handy to not download yet-another-tarball have a look at  
>> the checksums and move it to the right destination, than do  
>> configure/make for the libs and start over with unbound again. How  
>> many people actually need it to be excluded?
>
> see many discussions here in the last. The debian and fedora maintainers
> both asks for it to be decoupled, as the tar ball copy inside unbound is
> confusing and can sometimes accidentally get linked by unbound if the
> ldns dev/devel package is not installed. Staticly linked libraries on
> systems are not good. If you think you have ldns 1.6.10 but unbound had
> been statically linked to 1.6.9, you might have a security issue.....

I thought that one have to explicit set --with-ldns-builtin to get  
this behavior??

> Also, not every unbound requires a new ldns.

But it is no error to use latest unbound with latest ldns, no?

> And of course, people use ldns and ldns-python without unbound.

For sure, but many people use unbound without anything other using  
ldns so an option to simply built unbound with static linked ldns  
would be nice to have. A normal update from source with unbound was  
far below an hour, with 1.4.12 i#m struggling since two days :-(

Regards

Andreas