On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 03:50:46PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > Hello Andrew, Hi Frans, > On Thursday 20 October 2005 08:47, Andrew Pollock wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 12:55:32PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote: > > > TTBOMK, the dhcp3-client udeb that dhcp3 produces isn't currently > > > used. > > > > > > I'm intending to fiddle with klibc's ipconfig once the niggling build > > > issues are resolved to see if we can't remove the reliance on the > > > dhcp-client udeb (I have the ulterior motive of trying to get rid of > > > the v2 DHCP package and turn dhcp3 into dhcp). > > > > Judging by the resounding silence, I'm going to assume the answer is > > "no" and cease creating a udeb with my next upload. > > I'm very sorry about the fact that we've not responded to your mail > before. There are basically two reasons for this. > > One, we were very busy with the d-i beta1 release at the time and > especially Joey was frustrated because of the setbacks we had in that > process. > > Two, we are really in a bind regarding the dhcp-client -> dhcp3-client > transition. We have been discussing it on and off over the past months > and Joey has even recently checked once again if dhcp3-client could be > used as is, but the increase in size of the udeb is a real problem for > d-i, especially for floppy based installations [1]. > Add to that the fact that dhcp-client currently crashes on Sparc > (#339711). > > We really would like to make the switch to a dhcp3-client udeb, but with > its current size it would just mean a big regression for d-i. > > Is there any way the udeb could be reduced in size, for example by > disabling some functionality that's not required in an installation > context? > Not really that I know of. -Os (I'm told) doesn't make a significant difference, which is why I've been reluctant to spend the time rejigging the build system to build the udeb with it. I've been keen, but lacking the time and know how, to play with klibc-util's ipconfig, which has been suggested as a solution in the past. udhcpc has also been suggested. Apparently at one time was found to be unsuitable, but that situation may have changed? I'm rather distracted (and in temporary accomodation at present) relocating countries, but I hope that within a month I'll be settled again, and have some time to spend on this. I realise that this an eternity, but it's the best I can offer. regards Andrew
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature