Bug 256450 - dns/djbdns: Deprecate and set expiration date to 2021-09-06
Summary: dns/djbdns: Deprecate and set expiration date to 2021-09-06
Status: Open
Alias: None
Product: Ports & Packages
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Individual Port(s) (show other bugs)
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any Any
: --- Affects Only Me
Assignee: David Thiel
Depends on:
Blocks: 246317
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2021-06-06 18:24 UTC by Daniel Engberg
Modified: 2021-06-06 21:00 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
bugzilla: maintainer-feedback? (lx)

Patch for djbdns (1.29 KB, patch)
2021-06-06 18:24 UTC, Daniel Engberg
no flags Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Daniel Engberg 2021-06-06 18:24:03 UTC
Created attachment 225604 [details]
Patch for djbdns

This is now considered unmaintained by upstream and several have removed it from their package/doesn't offer it (CentOS, Debian (removed from stable), Fedora, OpenBSD, OpenSUSE, Ubuntu to mention a few).

For more technical insight https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=796118 etc
Comment 1 David Thiel freebsd_committer 2021-06-06 18:40:21 UTC
While I agree that dnscache is somewhat obsolete, tinydns is still solid and widely used, and removing it would likely cause more frustration than good. Splitting it into separate ports would be better, but that would break patches (like the IPv6 one). I'm open to other suggestions, but I personally am not in favor of removal.
Comment 2 Daniel Engberg 2021-06-06 19:24:38 UTC

Perhaps another solution would be migrating to https://github.com/mbhangui/tinydnssec (another fork seems to be http://pjp.dgplug.org/ndjbdns/ but dead as far as I can tell) which at least is (somewhat?) maintained?

I do understand your concern however I also think that we need to consider the fact we should/need to move forward at some point and it's imho better sooner than later. 3 months might be a short in that regard, perhaps 6 months would be better depending on which route we'll take.
Comment 3 David Thiel freebsd_committer 2021-06-06 20:22:51 UTC
Of those two, I lean toward ndjbdns — it does switch to .conf files which would unfortunately require manual migration, and it is GPL, but at least it doesn't introduce a new dependency on another libc replacement. There's an updated fork of it here we could consider:


Another option could be going with the version included in this, which does at least consider FreeBSD:


Personally, the main thing keeping me on tinydns is tinydns-data. If there were anything that supported that format or spit out the abominable BIND format zone files from it, I'd be more inclined to abandon djbdns altogether.

Any thoughts on those?
Comment 4 Daniel Engberg 2021-06-06 21:00:25 UTC
Hmm.. the samboy fork seems like a good tradeoff I we want to keep it?

I found this https://gist.github.com/gmr/10434366 but I haven't tested it myself and since it's from 2014 I would imagine that you need python 2.x