From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.windriver.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1D987232E for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 08:13:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.9/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sB58DJAA009487 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 5 Dec 2014 00:13:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.224.162.226] (128.224.162.226) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.174.1; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 00:13:19 -0800 Message-ID: <54816939.4060707@windriver.com> Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2014 16:13:45 +0800 From: ChenQi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Burton, Ross" References: <2d5ed9ff99319e5eb332b5008b39ee8d6e381dd1.1417499998.git.Qi.Chen@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: X-Originating-IP: [128.224.162.226] Cc: OE-core Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] bind: fix conf.patch to remove configuration that causes failure X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 08:13:25 -0000 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060401010105080501040705" --------------060401010105080501040705 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/03/2014 08:23 PM, Burton, Ross wrote: > > On 2 December 2014 at 06:00, Chen Qi > wrote: > > conf.patch added db.255 confgiuration entry to named.conf. However, > We don't have db.255 configuration file, so remove this entry to avoid > the following failure. > > > Can you explain why the correct fix is to remove the reference to > db.255, and not add a db.255 configuration file? > > Ross Hi Ross, Sorry for the late reply. I just noticed this email. I chose to remove reference to db.255 because I saw there was no db.255. I didn't take a second thinking about this problem. I will send out V2 by adding db.255 configuration file. Best Regards, Chen Qi --------------060401010105080501040705 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 12/03/2014 08:23 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:

On 2 December 2014 at 06:00, Chen Qi <Qi.Chen@windriver.com> wrote:
conf.patch added db.255 confgiuration entry to named.conf. However,
We don't have db.255 configuration file, so remove this entry to avoid
the following failure.

Can you explain why the correct fix is to remove the reference to db.255, and not add a db.255 configuration file?

Ross

Hi Ross,

Sorry for the late reply. I just noticed this email.

I chose to remove reference to db.255 because I saw there was no db.255.
I didn't take a second thinking about this problem.

I will send out V2 by adding db.255 configuration file.

Best Regards,
Chen Qi

--------------060401010105080501040705--