Comment 43 for bug 1710278

Ok I have something ready and installable to do further testing now.

This is introducing a new binary package called "bind9-single-thread"

If someone has something against the package name, please let me know, but "bind9-single-thread" is what I found the most obvious without looking at the description/changelog or else. That is pure esthetic so it can be changed at anytime before the SRU, so I'm all ears if someone come up with a better naming idea.

* With the following "bind9" and "bind9-single-thread" can't co-exist on the same machine (not co-installable). To do so I have put in place 2 things as follow:

# d/control:
Package: bind9
Conflicts: bind9-single-thread
Replaces: bind9-single-thread

Package: bind9-single-thread
Conflicts: bind9
Replaces: bind9

References:
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-conflicts #
when two packages provide the same file and will continue to do so,

https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-replaces
Second, Replaces allows the packaging system to resolve which package should be removed when there is a conflict (see Conflicting binary packages - Conflicts). This usage only takes effect when the two packages do conflict, so that the two usages of this field do not interfere with each other.

Next step is to test MAAS against "bind9-single-thread" with DNSSEC as it seems the way to trigger the deadlocks in bind9 and the reason why we are introducing a single-thread binary package.

I'll share the PPA later today.

- Eric