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 <ond...@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-b...@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 (k...@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> > D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant > _______________________________________________ > pkg-dns-devel mailing list > pkg-dns-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org > https://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-dns-devel > Email had 1 attachment: > + signature.asc > 1k (application/pgp-signature)
