On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 09:50 -0500, Steven Stromer wrote: > yum list bind-config does not return any results in either my FC4 or > FC6 installs. > caching-nameserver installs a similar, but different set of files > than a standard authoritative nameserver expects, from my comparisons. Upon reflection, I remember that they were the same package. There was a brief name change, or it was proposed, to bind-config, which was argued against and rejected. What are the differences? They'd both need root servers. They both could have local (LAN) addresses preloaded (localhost, localdomain, etc.), though it wouldn't be required (users could add such things, if they wanted). The differences I can think of would be whether the server responded to queries other than for its own domains, and whether it'll refer to other servers for things it can't answer by itself. -- (Currently testing FC5, but still running FC4, if that's important.) Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
