Re: Opinion on Debian freeze, FHS & IPv6
On Mon, Aug 09, 1999 at 04:01:03PM -0400, Brad Allen wrote:
> I write to you as someone who wants to tell you what I wish to see in
> a Debian distribution who is seriously considering a switch as a user
> from RedHat (due to a lack of reponsiveness). First off, I am
> concerned that the current stable release uses a kernel quite a few
> years old:
That's because when it was released, 2.2 wasn't out.
> 3. On a minor note, I find the "ip" program written by Alexey Kuznetsov
> <kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru> available at ftp://ftp.inr.ac.ru/ip-routing/
> which replaces the "ifconfig" and "route" commands to be very well
> written in terms of usability and consistency, and recommend it to
> everyone who uses Linux 2.2+ and to the Debian distribution in
> general; I have not actually cracked open Potato so do not know
> the status of "ip" and the old "ifconfig"/"route" crap.
We have both. But ifconfig and route are much better documented so they're
the ones in the base system.
> 4. I recommend the following time-release plan for IPv6 support:
>
> Here I work under the assumptions that IPv6 is not supported at
> this time by Debian (OOTB)
In unstable, it is partially.
> and that a good plan for it does not exist; assumtions that may be
> woefully wrong since I have not actually looked; please interpolate as
> appropriate.
We have a mailing list debian-ipv6 for discussing it. The current plan is
that all networking programs in the base system should support it; other
programs should if it is supported upstream but hardly anything is.
> chore for the very next stable release, I do recommend that at the
> very least the core-core-core packages be compiled with IPv6
> enabled
We already have rather more than that.
> What this means specifically is that the kernel (v2.2) and the
> "ip" utility be compiled with IPv6 support compiled in (that is
> only two packages and trivial to do by a freeze date even less
> than a month away; I think it's ok to do IPv6 as a module in the
> kernel).
We have IPv6 versions of both ip and ifconfig/route. We don't have an IPv6
kernel: I'm not sure what the issues are about that, though I agree that I
can't see how having an ipv6.o included would do any harm.
We also have inetd, telnet/telnetd, apache, chimera2 (a web browser), exim
and a few others.
Reply to: