[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: WTF is with dhcp?

On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 12:11:02PM -0500, Eloy A. Paris wrote:

> Now, I would have liked to upload my experimental packages for the 3.x
> series a long time ago (October 5, 2001 that was when DHCP ISC 3.0 was
> released.) The problem is that the boot floppies are using the DHCP client
> from the 2.x series. The client in the 3.x series is too big to be handled
> now by the boot floppies so when I mentioned that I was ready to upload to
> unstable my 3.x packages I was told to wait: if the 3.x packages had moved
> from unstable to testing and then to frozen that would have meant problems
> for the boot-floppies team.

This is not a big problem...just name the packages differently.  I built
dhcp 3.0 packages for my own use, and named them:


The binary packages cannot be installed at the same time as the dhcp 2.x
packages, but both source packages can coexist.  This means that the
boot-floppies (and even woody) could continue to use 2.x, while breaking in
3.x for the rest of us (and woody+1).

> With this quick introduction is that I want to present my plan for fixing
> the current problems with the DHCP packages:
> I realize the DHCP 2.x packages in testing are important and I have
> decided to fix the problems now. I want to focus on fixing the current
> problems with the 2.x DHCP packages. Once the most important bugs are
> taken care of I will upload the 3.x packages to unstable, and file a
> RC bug against them so they can't move into testing. The reason is the
> requirement of the boot floppies to use the 2.x DHCP client.

The problem with this approach is that there could be new problems with, or
requirements for, boot-floppies, which require corresponding modifications
in the DHCP packages.  Maintaining separate source packages for 2.x and 3.x
makes this straightforward.

> Finally, I wanted to ask if there's any interest in keeping the ISC DHCP
> v2 packages in the distribution, along the new v3 packages. I was thinking
> about renaming the v2 packages as dhcp2, dhcp-client2 and dhcp-relay2, and
> have the new v3 packages with the normal names (dhcp, dhcp-client, etc.)

This accomplishes the same thing, but requires changes in boot-floppies and
elsewhere to reference the new package names.  I think it would be better to
do it the other way around.

If you do not have the time or inclination to maintain both sets of
packages, I could take care of one of them.

 - mdz

Reply to: