IP 198.32.64.12-OLD had changed to 199.7.83.42 in 2007. files/dnsroots.patch needs updating. See http://www.ripe.net/ripe/maillists/archives/dns-wg/2007/msg00171.html Reproducible: Always
Created attachment 176208 [details, diff] New version of files/dnsroots.patch Please apply this patch. It's trivial, and 198.32.64.12 stopped responding in May 2008.
Created attachment 223529 [details] updated djbdns-1.05-r23.ebuild ported from http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/djbdns/djbdns/PKGBUILD : --- djbdns-1.05-r23.ebuild.orig 2009-03-23 06:36:46.000000000 +0100 +++ djbdns-1.05-r23.ebuild 2010-03-14 14:55:58.000000000 +0100 @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ IPV6_PATCH="test23" SRC_URI=" http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/${P}.tar.gz + http://www.internic.net/zones/named.root ipv6? ( http://www.fefe.de/dns/${P}-${IPV6_PATCH}.diff.bz2 ) " @@ -69,6 +70,11 @@ src_unpack() { epatch "${FILESDIR}/${PV}-errno.patch" + # Update dnsroots.global + awk --posix + '/\.ROOT-SERVERS\.NET.*[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}\.[0-9]{1,3}/ { + print $4; }' < ${FILESDIR}/named.root > ${S}/dnsroots.global || die 'dnsroots.global failed' + if [[ -n "${DJBDNS_PATCH_DIR}" && -d "${DJBDNS_PATCH_DIR}" ]] then echo
(In reply to comment #2) > Created attachment 223529 [details] > updated djbdns-1.05-r23.ebuild > > ported from http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/djbdns/djbdns/PKGBUILD : > I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that this will fail in the long run, because portage keeps a hash of every file in the manifest. When named.root is updated, the maintainer would have to do some work anyway. So, it might be easier to just update the dnsroots.global patch every time the root servers change.
@Michael Do we have an updated version that needs to make it into Portage to close this?
Created attachment 268479 [details, diff] Updated dnsroots.patch with current root servers. This dnsroots.patch updates to the latest list of root servers. Is it ok to just dump this in $FILESDIR (and affect past revisions)? I don't see a better option; it just feels a little dirty.
Created attachment 268771 [details, diff] Same as the previous dnsroots.patch, renamed.
Created attachment 268773 [details, diff] Revbump utilizing the new patch. Nevermind, this is a better option. This should ensure that users get the new roots patch. I simply replaced the old dnsroots.patch rather than building upon it.
(In reply to comment #7) > Created attachment 268773 [details, diff] > Revbump utilizing the new patch. > > Nevermind, this is a better option. This should ensure that users get the new > roots patch. I simply replaced the old dnsroots.patch rather than building upon > it. Just to confirm, use the new dnsroots.patch but rename it to dnsroots-r25. patch and then revbump the ebuild to -r25 and have it and only that use the new patch?
(In reply to comment #8) Yep.
I think I've changed my mind about this one. We should update dnsroots.global for old revisions of djbdns, too. So, the fix would be, 1. Replace dnsroots.patch with either of those 356-byte patches (they're the same). 2. Revbump djbdns (now at -r25) to -r26 to prompt a rebuild. No changes to the ebuild are needed.
+*djbdns-1.05-r26 (02 Jun 2012) + + 02 Jun 2012; Michael Weber <xmw@gentoo.org> +djbdns-1.05-r26.ebuild, + files/dnsroots.patch: + Revbump to install new root servers list (bug 248247) +
