Version bump of dnrd. This is a bugfix release and fixes some issues with timeouts/deactivation and reactivation of upstream servers, especially when dnscache from djbdns is the upstream server. Windows/Cygwin support also added with this release Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3.
Created attachment 52108 [details] dnrd-2.19.ebuild Added "dodir /etc/dnrd", because dnrd refuses to start when there is no /etc/dnrd directory (http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83277)
Also note that dnrd needs to be removed from www-proxy, for it is stale and is not actually a proxy for the world wide web.
One mooore thing: bug 81474 should probably be a duplicate of this one since this contains the fix for bug 83277.
Any particular reason that this hasn't been committed to the portage tree yet? Anything I can to to help?
*** Bug 81474 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 88764 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Natanael, if you're willing to look after this package as a proxy-maintainer (that is to say -- you help me with all bug reports and issues with it), I'll be happy to be the maintainer until we find a gentoo dev more willing.
I would be happy to be a proxy-maintainer for DNRD. I maintain the DNRD project itself and the FreeBSD port too and since Gentoo is my main development platform.... I'm glad you asked :)
seemant, could you have a look (see Comment #8). Thanks.
I have also updated this in my local portage tree and request the global tree be updated as well so I don't loose the e-build. ;)
*** Bug 83277 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Accepting assignment, I'll try and get this into the tree sometime next week after my small rush of finals.
I too, am very much looking forward to seeing this packing enter the official tree. For the past 2 weeks, I have been having to install dnrd-2.19 using PORTDIR_OVERLAY. I have to deploy that version on another 40 systems, and would benefit greatly from it being official. Chris White, How is it coming? I'm very busy with work currently, as you are I'm sure. However, Is their anything I can do to help?
I am working on the next upstream release. It will not use the "nobody" user but will need a separate user named "dnrd". The reason is that the use "nobody"is a generic user. By changing the uid to a dedicated "dnrd" user we are guaranteed that dnrd will not have any permissions on other potensial processes running as "nobody". Paranoia... :) We could actually do this in the currnet 2.19 version already, using the --uid option to dnrd. I am thinking of creating a user named "dnrd" in the ebuild and replace this line: /usr/sbin/dnrd $DNRD_OPTS &> /dev/null & with: /usr/sbin/dnrd --uid dnrd $DNRD_OPTS &> /dev/null & in /etc/init.d/dnrd Anyone having anything against that? If not, would anyone like to update the ebuild and init script? (I could do it but I'd rather work on dnrd than research the gentoo policies on creting new users) In next upstream release (2.20) it will try to run as "dnrd" by default.
Created attachment 63367 [details] dnrd-2.19.ebuild (updated ebuild) Updated ebuild that creates the user and group "dnrd". This obsoletes the previous dnrd-2.19.ebuild posted here.
Created attachment 63368 [details] files/dnrd this is the updated /etc/init.d/dnrd script that starts dnrd as the user "dnrd" instead of "nobody".
This bug can be closed. It's fixed in #99520.
2.19.1 in portage, closing.