Dan's "Ease of Use" Table, Redux (was Re: bind 8.2.4: limiting used memory?)

[D. J. Bernstein]

Kevin Darcy writes:
> I scrutinize every new package I install

Ah. So now you're claiming that it's easier to review the BIND package,
totalling 1372 kilobytes, than to review the daemontools and ucspi-tcp
and djbdns packages, totalling 173 kilobytes?

> As for "... not thoroughly described in the BIND manual", this phrase is
> just a cheap potshot.

It actually understates the difficulty for BIND system administrators.

Consider, for example, ISC's f.root-servers.net, which reportedly uses
BIND 8.2.4 under Digital UNIX. Can you tell me what files need to be
copied to a chroot jail for this operating system? (Does ISC know? Is
BIND running chrooted on f.root-servers.net?)

> people are expected to write custom scripts/programs on top of BIND

How can you claim that this is as easy as having the scripts already
provided? Ridiculous.

Why doesn't the BIND company write their own add-ns and add-host and
add-mx and add-childns tools, and include them with the package, and
support them, instead of making their users suffer?

> Either "checking the results" is so arduous that it deserves a "step"
> for *both* packages

Checking for errors is trivial ONCE THE ERROR LIST IS ON THE SCREEN.
With djbdns, this happens automatically. In contrast, with a typical
BIND installation, this needs an extra step, as shown in my table.

> This dependency/complication is conveniently *not* mentioned in your
> "ease of use" table.

That's because the extra work is a figment of your imagination. All
these tools are included in the initial installation. Configuration is
handled automatically by the dnscache-conf and tinydns-conf steps shown
in my table, as I told you before.

---Dan