Re: [Pkg-dns-devel] What to do with isc-dhcp-client-udeb?
Hi KiBi,
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?
Ondrej
--
Ondřej Surý <ondrej@sury.org>
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018, at 16:20, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Hi bind9 people,
>
> I've just gotten this:
>
> > Subject: udeb uninstallability trend: worse (+18/-)
> udeb uninstallability watcher <debian-boot@lists.debian.org> (2018-01-22):
> > Newly-broken packages in testing
> > isc-dhcp-client-udeb armel mips mipsel
> > libdns-export169-udeb armel mips mipsel
> > libirs-export160-udeb armel mips mipsel
> > libisc-export166-udeb armel mips mipsel
> > libisccc-export160-udeb armel mips mipsel
> > libisccfg-export160-udeb armel mips mipsel
> >
> > Uninstallability trend: worse (+18/-0)
> > Uninstallability count: 397
>
> I happened to have missed its unstable counterpart, because those come in
> batches, depending on the current buildd status of packages. I thought the
> “Newly-broken” packages for armel, mips, and mipsel were an artifact of
> late builds.
>
> I don't know anything about this libatomic1; but from a look at the 0013
> patch, it seems to be a need for a platform rather than for a feature…
>
> Anyway, I'm not sure what to do with isc-dhcp-client-udeb; it's getting
> broken on a regular fashion, and its purpose was mainly for non-Linux
> ports AFAICR.
>
> I'm not sure how BSD is doing these days; maybe hurd is the only user
> left?
>
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/>
> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
> _______________________________________________
> pkg-dns-devel mailing list
> pkg-dns-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
> https://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-dns-devel
> Email had 1 attachment:
> + signature.asc
> 1k (application/pgp-signature)
Reply to: