Hi all, Ondřej Surý <ondrej@sury.org> (2018-01-23): > I would also love to get rid of the isc-dhcp-client-udeb, but so far > the message from the busybox team was that the dhcp client there > doesn't compile there and needs some upstream work to get it working. > > (As a matter of fact, the busybox doesn't compile at all on kfreebsd-* > and hurd-i386 right now.) > > As for the BIND libraries and libatomic. > > There has been some effort to replace the custom atomic code with a > C-provided counterpart - it also fixes the mips deadlocks. > > But generally, I would prefer to move all BIND libraries into "custom" > namespace, so the libraries are not used by anything else, and either: > > a) use the custom copy of the libraries inside isc-dhcp > b) prepare separate package for the lib<something>-udeb that would > follow the BIND 9.11 development (BIND 9.11 is to be supported for > next 4 years) and then remove those AND isc-dhcp from Debian. > > The upcoming ISC-DHCP release 4.4.0 is ought to be the _last_ major > upgrade, see: https://www.isc.org/blogs/isc-dhcp-the-last-branch/ > > And if porting udhcpc to kFreeBSD proves to be much work, then perhaps > porting dhclient from OpenBSD might be an option? Thanks for your feedback, Ondřej. It'd be helpful to have some input from hurd and kfreebsd people, so that we know what to do with isc-dhcp-client-udeb in the end… Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature