On 23/10/17 08:36, Ondřej Surý wrote: > Hi, > > while revising bind9 udebs, KiBi suggested that non-Linux architectures > might be using isc-dhcpd instead of udhcpd due some problems and it > might be a good idea to revise the decision now that we have a busybox > maintainer?
I presume you actually mean the DHCP client here (isc-dhcp-client and udhcpc) as opposed to the server implementation. Please correct me if I'm wrong about this. Speaking as one of the two busybox maintainers, we'd certainly be happy to help make sure udhcpc is usable across as many systems as possible in Debian. As James has mentioned the udhcpc code is Linux-specific currently so needs additional porting work to non-Linux architectures, but we'd be happy to work with porters and liaise with upstream to get patches integrated. I'm going to personally refrain from suggesting one option over another as I feel it represents a conflict of interest, but I'm definitely interested in levelling the playing field and making it more difficult to pick between the two! Cheers, Chris -- Chris Boot bo...@debian.org GPG: 8467 53CB 1921 3142 C56D C918 F5C8 3C05 D9CE EEEE
