Re: Potentially Predatory Pre-Announcement of Possible Vaporware (zinq-djbdns-0.01)

>> Honestly, what's the requirement?  It compiles fine without it now,
>> so this appears to be adding a dependency with little benefit.
>I tend to agree.

Other than the errno nonsense, which we all know is a one line patch,
I've never heard any complaints about the portability of djbdns.

>A better project (IMO) would be to provide well-packaged RPMS.

Right.  There's a few reasonable patches worth packaging in, e.g., the
small bug fixes from J. deBPollard.  Beyond that, the recently
discussed patchlet to handle large responses seems benign and useful,
and at some point we'll need to think about EDNS0 and maybe even
DNSSEC.

R's,
John