Our unbound package is quite different from upstream version (mainly for historical reasons). So luci app is missing, because configuration is also different.
what are ‘historical reasons’ for the difference with upstream? none of my business but nonetheless curious as why to burden self with package maintainace when it is readily available in the upstream in the first place, that incl. a luci app and being more advanced in the upstream?
what are the differences in the configuration?
unbound package as it is currently provided by the downstream repo it is not userfriendly and makes one jumping through a lot of hoops to configure unbound properly (e.g. finding missing files). It is by purpose in order to promote knot, or?
named.cache been updated 5 years ago albeit good practice suggests to refresh/update it semestral.
unbound-control does not show as available package only unbound-control setup, that is perhaps where the bug starts