an option either takes a
parameter or not.
> > Otherwise it looks good to me, please submit a patch to the
> > corresponding upstream & Debian maintainers :)
>
> I'm a bit lost here. Is it enough to simply send the patch to
> pkg-dhcp-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org or i
ers :)
I'm a bit lost here. Is it enough to simply send the patch to
pkg-dhcp-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org or is something else required?
Hello,
Joan Lledó, on lun. 11 sept. 2017 12:59:34 +0200, wrote:
> To avoid applying the patch, I suggest to replace the PREINIT command for
> this:
> fsysopts /servers/socket/2 -i ${interface} -a
>
> The "-a" option sets the address to 0.0.0.0, which works fine for both
> pfinet and lwip.
It lo
Hello,
In my tests on the lwip translator, I've observed that the DHCP client
sets the interface address to 255.255.255.255 before sending the
DHCPDISCOVER messages. I found the source of this behaviour in the
dhclient-script[1].
The script executes "fsysopts /servers/socket/2 -i $
gt; not enable ipv6, and dhcpd enables it.
>
> > > So in the end, the first part is not trivial but can be checked on Linux
> > > (and actually fixes a bug), and the second and third part look trivial
> > > to me, thus the wonder.
> >
> > I
end, the first part is not trivial but can be checked on Linux
> > (and actually fixes a bug), and the second and third part look trivial
> > to me, thus the wonder.
>
> I think we'll get there, eventually. It might just take a while.
Well, we'd like to manage to rele
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 12:42:06AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Samuel Thibault, le Sat 21 Jan 2012 23:45:24 +0100, a écrit :
> > Andrew Pollock, le Wed 11 Jan 2012 22:12:11 -0800, a écrit :
> > > I'm expecting to have a face-to-face meeting with the ISC DHCP folks next
Samuel Thibault, le Sat 21 Jan 2012 23:45:24 +0100, a écrit :
> Andrew Pollock, le Wed 11 Jan 2012 22:12:11 -0800, a écrit :
> > I'm expecting to have a face-to-face meeting with the ISC DHCP folks next
> > week,
> > and the Hurd situation is one of the to
Andrew Pollock, le Wed 11 Jan 2012 22:12:11 -0800, a écrit :
> I'm expecting to have a face-to-face meeting with the ISC DHCP folks next
> week,
> and the Hurd situation is one of the topics of discussion. If the stakeholders
> from debian-hurd want me to convey anything in parti
script for now.
> --- isc-dhcp-4.1.1-P1~/client/dhclient.c 2011-03-03 01:10:28.0
> +0000
> +++ isc-dhcp-4.1.1-P1/client/dhclient.c 2011-03-03 01:11:08.0
> +
> @@ -342,21 +342,33 @@
>* to be reopened after chdir() has been called
>
py to
> > review your next submissiosn to upstream, before you send them.
>
> I'm expecting to have a face-to-face meeting with the ISC DHCP folks next
> week,
> and the Hurd situation is one of the topics of discussion. If the stakeholders
> from debian-hurd want me to convey an
;m expecting to have a face-to-face meeting with the ISC DHCP folks next week,
and the Hurd situation is one of the topics of discussion. If the stakeholders
from debian-hurd want me to convey anything in particular, then now's the time
to speak up.
I don't have a dog in this fight. I don
Svante Signell writes ("Re: [Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp
patch in ISC-Bugs #24697 (Debian Bug #616290)?]"):
> [ stuff ]
It looks like I'm not expressing myself well enough. Or at any rate,
I'm not getting through. Perhaps someone else would like to
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 14:20 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Svante Signell writes ("Re: [Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp
> patch in ISC-Bugs #24697 (Debian Bug #616290)?]"):
> > On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 14:15 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > Where can I f
Svante Signell writes ("Re: [Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp
patch in ISC-Bugs #24697 (Debian Bug #616290)?]"):
> On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 14:15 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Where can I find the detailed explanation of why this patch is
> > required an
On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 14:15 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Svante Signell writes ("[Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp
> patch in ISC-Bugs #24697 (Debian Bug #616290)?]"):
> > Dear Debian/Hurd, GNU/Hurd and Debian-devel people. This arrived today.
> > Any id
Svante Signell writes ("[Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp patch
in ISC-Bugs #24697 (Debian Bug #616290)?]"):
> Dear Debian/Hurd, GNU/Hurd and Debian-devel people. This arrived today.
> Any ideas on how to proceed? Is it possible to create a Hurd-specific
> for
Dear Debian/Hurd, GNU/Hurd and Debian-devel people. This arrived today.
Any ideas on how to proceed? Is it possible to create a Hurd-specific
fork of the latest ISC-DHCP release? DHCP is an essential package in the
Debian Installer.
Is it possible to do something at Debian level? The text below
>>
>> The trigger happening in ext2fs, which holds the /servers/sockets/2 node
>> and the on-disk translator record that tells what to run.
>
> I'll update myself on translators before replying again about this. One
> thing is still bugging me: How do I test (know)
> olafbuddenha...@gmx.net writes:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 09:53:11AM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
>> Still much more to learn to be really able to contribute.
> Eh? You just made a pretty non-trivial contribution right there :-)
It seems that it's not the ability to do the bi
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 09:53:11AM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> Still much more to learn to be really able to contribute.
Eh? You just made a pretty non-trivial contribution right there :-)
-antrik-
On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 09:41 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Thu 03 Mar 2011 08:22:06 +0100, a écrit :
> > Q: Should I mention the patch in bug 602312, needed for a successful
> > build from source?
>
> No need to, that's a separate bug.
Sorry, too late, bug report just submitte
Package: isc-dhcp
Version: 4.1.1-P1-16
Severity: important
Tags: patch, upstream
User: debian-h...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: hurd
Attached are four patches to the isc-dhcp package to enable a successful
build for GNU/Hurd. This patch has been developed together with Samuel
Thibault, who improved
Svante Signell, le Thu 03 Mar 2011 08:22:06 +0100, a écrit :
> Q: Should I mention the patch in bug 602312, needed for a successful
> build from source?
No need to, that's a separate bug.
> C: I see that you used #ifdefs in the source code, instead of trying to
> find one way of writing the code.
On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 03:41 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Svante Signell, le Wed 02 Mar 2011 09:17:09 +0100, a écrit :
> > On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 02:28 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> >
> > Ok, I'm attaching the patch, fix_ftbfs4hurd.dpatch,
>
> Great, it basically just works! I've u
g boring tedious work to get things working again.
You deserve the credit, even if I ended up rewriting things.
Samuel
diff -urN isc-dhcp-4.1.1-P1.original/debian/control
isc-dhcp-4.1.1-P1/debian/control
--- isc-dhcp-4.1.1-P1.original/debian/control 2011-03-02 23:35:17.0
+
+++ i
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 09:48 +0100, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 07:50:53PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
>
> > Is anybody interested in a working dhcp for GNU/Hurd, I've spent some
> > time on this now, is this effort just in vain?
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 07:50:53PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> Is anybody interested in a working dhcp for GNU/Hurd, I've spent some
> time on this now, is this effort just in vain??
Well, I don't use dhcp at home; but I'd certainly appreciate working
dhcp when on the road :-)
-antrik-
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 07:18:23AM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> I don't have time or space to build libc6 on my qemu box. Hurd
> might be possible, but definitely not libc (I've built libc before on
> much more capable systems than in a VM), and the space and memory
> requirements are very
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 05:35:07PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> Yes, but there must be a script starting all the translators during
> boot, and the parameters for the static parameters of the network (pi
> address, netmask, gateway, etc) should be in some file. I'm unable to
> find these fi
Alle mercoledì 2 marzo 2011, Svante Signell ha scritto:
> Package: isc-dhcp-client
> Architecture: any
> Depends: debianutils (>= 2.8.2), isc-dhcp-common (=
> ${binary:Version}),
>
> -iproute [linux-any], ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
> (I'm not sure about the s
eeded, it looks like the Linux package does not depend on
> net-tools, containing route and ifconfig or iputils-ping containing
> ping?)
>
> Package: isc-dhcp-client
> Architecture: any
> Depends: debianutils (>= 2.8.2), isc-dhcp-common (= ${binary:Version}),
>
>
I forgot to comment on the udeb version: I don't think we want to create
an inetutils-tools udeb package, while we can simply issue settrans
which should be easy and fine enough, since we only handle one
interface, thus my changes.
Samuel
k even more to the Linux version.
- About -a vs -A vs --address: don't mix pfinet/fsysopts options with
inetutils-ifconfig options: although they happen to be very similar,
they are not the same, that's why -A wasn't working for fsysopts.
> One thing remains to do: The file
&g
Diego Nieto Cid, le Tue 01 Mar 2011 18:09:24 -0300, a écrit :
> 2011/3/1 Samuel Thibault :
> > Didn't we have working equivalent in our latest dhcp script?
> >
>
> The script I tried wasn't even calling ifconfig succesfully. IIRC, the
> command line argument
Svante Signell, le Tue 01 Mar 2011 20:50:33 +0100, a écrit :
> On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 09:03 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Svante Signell, le Tue 01 Mar 2011 08:50:39 +0100, a écrit :
> > > I have now working scripts dhclient-script.hurd and
> > > dhclient-script.hurd.udeb
> >
> > Ok, good, ple
2011/3/1 Samuel Thibault :
> Didn't we have working equivalent in our latest dhcp script?
>
The script I tried wasn't even calling ifconfig succesfully. IIRC, the
command line arguments weren't accepted.
But as settrans was called afterwards everything appeared to work fine.
ebug output by adding set -x to the scripts.
One thing remains to do: The file
/etc/dhcp/dhclient-exit-hooks.d/rfc3442-classless-routes should not be
run on GNU/Hurd (or should be adapted to not use /sbin/route). Now it is
called but does nothing.
> > Both udeb for Linux and kfreeBSD have
ld be commands for activating and shutting down the interface,
> but for Hurd they don't work.
>
> inetutils-ifconfig -i eth0 --up
> inetutils-ifconfig: SIOCSIFFLAGS failed: (os/device) invalid IO size
>
> inetutils-ifconfig -i eth0 --down
I'm not really surprised actually.
Didn't we have working equivalent in our latest dhcp script?
Samuel
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 23:57 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Wed 23 Feb 2011 10:20:43 +0100, a écrit :
> > Something still seems to be wrong with the dhclient, since I cannot get
> > out externally with eth0 set up with dhcp, and apt-get does not work.
> >
translator configured there.
> >
> > The trigger happening in ext2fs, which holds the /servers/sockets/2 node
> > and the on-disk translator record that tells what to run.
>
> I'll update myself on translators before replying again about this. One
> thing is sti
the /servers/sockets/2 node
> and the on-disk translator record that tells what to run.
I'll update myself on translators before replying again about this. One
thing is still bugging me: How do I test (know) if the dhcp-client I've
patched and built works properly or not??? H
Samuel Thibault, le Sun 27 Feb 2011 17:43:12 +0100, a écrit :
> that glibc opens /servers/sockets/2, which thus triggers the pfinet
> translator configured there.
The trigger happening in ext2fs, which holds the /servers/sockets/2 node
and the on-disk translator record that tells what to run.
Sam
Svante Signell, le Sun 27 Feb 2011 17:35:07 +0100, a écrit :
> On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 14:17 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Svante Signell, le Sun 27 Feb 2011 14:07:17 +0100, a écrit :
> ...
> > > Thanks, I tried the updated libc and pfinet and my built dhcp-client on
>
On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 14:17 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Sun 27 Feb 2011 14:07:17 +0100, a écrit :
...
> > Thanks, I tried the updated libc and pfinet and my built dhcp-client on
> > another computer and things seem to work!! :-) I'm not sure if
On 27/02/11 13:17, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Sun 27 Feb 2011 14:07:17 +0100, a écrit :
>> I was referring to the git,hg or whatever archive where the latest
>> sources are checked in.
>
> apt-get source would tell you that URL, which happens to be
> svn://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-g
t; errors by using
> >
> > export MALLOC_CHECK_=1
>
> Thanks, I tried the updated libc and pfinet and my built dhcp-client on
> another computer and things seem to work!! :-) I'm not sure if it works
> though: Commenting out eth0 in /etc/network/interfaces and reboot
BRARY_PATH=/tmp/mylibc /etc/init.d/ssh restart
>
> That being said, remember man 3 free: you can tell free() to ignore
> errors by using
>
> export MALLOC_CHECK_=1
Thanks, I tried the updated libc and pfinet and my built dhcp-client on
another computer and things seem to work!
Svante Signell, le Sat 26 Feb 2011 16:33:50 +0100, a écrit :
> > > Having it installed results in the same errors with both the old and
> > > the new versions of libc installed.
> >
> > So I guess the libc I provided you didn't actually have the fix.
>
> I've been looking for an updated glibc for
> Yes, that's what I said in an earlier mail and above: now that pfinet
> returns an answer (while it has never done so in the past), glibc
> crashes, so you need a fixed libc too.
>
> > Having it installed results in the same errors with both the old and
> > the new versions of libc installed.
>
Svante Signell, le Fri 25 Feb 2011 08:19:19 +0100, a écrit :
> On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 23:49 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Svante Signell, le Thu 24 Feb 2011 23:43:59 +0100, a écrit :
>
> > > Another question (I'm still a newbie): From which init file is the
> > > network started on Hurd.
> >
>
ket() on Hurd to start the networking with pfinet?
(I know this question might be sent to help-hurd instead of bug-hurd,
but since this is related to my efforts getting the dhcp (server and
client) working on Hurd, I reply here. Please tell if I should change
mailing list.)
Svante Signell, le Thu 24 Feb 2011 23:43:59 +0100, a écrit :
> > > BTW: Can I allocate larger than 4GB for a filesystem under qemu-kvm?
> >
> > Err, yes, sure, why would you think you can't?
>
> I saw somewhere that there are address space limitations on 3GB for the
> user and 1GB for the system
fg /servers/socket/2 /hurd/pfinet -i -a -m -g
anywhere (independent on if you have static or dhcp IP-address set
in /etc/networking/interfaces or not). Where are these calls?
The /etc/network/interfaces file seems to be parsed though during
network setup!
Svante Signell, le Thu 24 Feb 2011 18:44:48 +0100, a écrit :
> On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 12:53 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Svante Signell, le Thu 24 Feb 2011 12:42:13 +0100, a écrit :
> > > Something might be wrong with libc (or sshd), I get a free() error in
> > > libc when starting ssh: (when b
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 12:53 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Thu 24 Feb 2011 12:42:13 +0100, a écrit :
> > Something might be wrong with libc (or sshd), I get a free() error in
> > libc when starting ssh: (when booting or restarting)
> > /etc/init.d/ssh start
> > Starting OpenBSD
Alle giovedì 24 febbraio 2011, Samuel Thibault ha scritto:
> Svante Signell, le Thu 24 Feb 2011 12:42:13 +0100, a écrit :
> > I also still have the following problem with dbus during boot after
> > installing the new libc and pfinet:
> > Starting message bus: dbus
> > Failed to set socket option "/
Svante Signell, le Thu 24 Feb 2011 12:42:13 +0100, a écrit :
> Something might be wrong with libc (or sshd), I get a free() error in
> libc when starting ssh: (when booting or restarting)
> /etc/init.d/ssh start
> Starting OpenBSD Secure shell server: sshd
> *** glibc detected /usr/sbin/sshd: free(
On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 12:42 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Tue 22 Feb 2011 07:18:23 +0100, a écrit :
> > On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 02:04 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Svante Signell, le Tue 22 Feb 2011 00:38:03 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > gcc -g fails_on_hurd.c
> > > > ./a.out
>
ut externally with eth0 set up with dhcp, and apt-get does not work.
> > > iface eth0 inet dhcp
> >
> > (and you mentioned pfinet was lacking --gateway in fsysopts)
> >
> > I'd tend to think that the dhclient script is missing something here, to
> >
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 23:57 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Wed 23 Feb 2011 10:20:43 +0100, a écrit :
> > Something still seems to be wrong with the dhclient, since I cannot get
> > out externally with eth0 set up with dhcp, and apt-get does not work.
> >
Svante Signell, le Wed 23 Feb 2011 10:20:43 +0100, a écrit :
> Something still seems to be wrong with the dhclient, since I cannot get
> out externally with eth0 set up with dhcp, and apt-get does not work.
> iface eth0 inet dhcp
(and you mentioned pfinet was lacking --gateway in fsyso
Svante Signell, le Wed 23 Feb 2011 15:42:45 +0100, a écrit :
> How to stop and restart /hurd/pfinet with new parameters,
> kill the precess and start with:
>
> /hurd/pfinet --interface=eth0 --address=10.0.2.15 --netmask=255.255.0.0
> --gateway 10.0.2.2
"start" being settrans, -a, yes.
> or do I
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 13:47 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Wed 23 Feb 2011 10:20:43 +0100, a écrit :
> > root 80 0.1 0.2 132M 2.04M - So8:40PM 0:55.75 /hurd/pfinet
> > --interface=eth0 --address=10.0.2.15 --netmask=255.255.0.0
> > --gateway=10.0.2.2
>
> That informatio
Svante Signell, le Wed 23 Feb 2011 10:20:43 +0100, a écrit :
> root 80 0.1 0.2 132M 2.04M - So8:40PM 0:55.75 /hurd/pfinet
> --interface=eth0 --address=10.0.2.15 --netmask=255.255.0.0
> --gateway=10.0.2.2
That information may be not relevant. Use fsysopts /servers/socket/2 to
get the actu
h0
/bin/sh: ifconfig: not found
Failed to bring up eth0.
> ifdown eth0
ifdown: interface eth0 not configured
Something still seems to be wrong with the dhclient, since I cannot get
out externally with eth0 set up with dhcp, and apt-get does not work.
iface eth0 inet dhcp
ssh -v external.site
Op
Svante Signell, le Tue 22 Feb 2011 07:18:23 +0100, a écrit :
> On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 02:04 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Svante Signell, le Tue 22 Feb 2011 00:38:03 +0100, a écrit :
> > > gcc -g fails_on_hurd.c
> > > ./a.out
> > > getifaddrs: (os/kern) successful
> >
> > To fix it you need bo
On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 02:04 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Tue 22 Feb 2011 00:38:03 +0100, a écrit :
> > gcc -g fails_on_hurd.c
> > ./a.out
> > getifaddrs: (os/kern) successful
>
> To fix it you need both the hurd patch I've just pushed and the glibc
> patch Roland has just pu
Svante Signell, le Tue 22 Feb 2011 00:38:03 +0100, a écrit :
> gcc -g fails_on_hurd.c
> ./a.out
> getifaddrs: (os/kern) successful
To fix it you need both the hurd patch I've just pushed and the glibc
patch Roland has just pushed.
Samuel
Svante Signell, le Tue 22 Feb 2011 00:38:03 +0100, a écrit :
> gcc -g fails_on_hurd.c
> ./a.out
> getifaddrs: (os/kern) successful
It's a bug in pfinet, I'll handle that.
Samuel
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 06:52 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 01:04 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Diego Nieto Cid, le Wed 16 Feb 2011 14:33:15 -0300, a écrit :
..
> I will integrate your patch with my changes to a create proper patch.
Almost complete by now, only dhclient-sc
patch.
> There is a need for a dhclient-script.hurd.udeb, which is a stripped
> down version of dhclient-script.hurd. Samuel, can you create this file?
Err, can't that be just shipped in the isc-dhcp package? I don't have
the time to look at the details, but can't we just do like for the Linux
case?
Samuel
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 01:04 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Diego Nieto Cid, le Wed 16 Feb 2011 14:33:15 -0300, a écrit :
> > Not really. IMHO, get_hw_addr is an orthogonal feature poorly
> > abstracted in isc-dhcp. To choose the implementation you have to use
> > dirty hac
Diego Nieto Cid, le Wed 16 Feb 2011 14:33:15 -0300, a écrit :
> Not really. IMHO, get_hw_addr is an orthogonal feature poorly
> abstracted in isc-dhcp. To choose the implementation you have to use
> dirty hacks like the following:
>
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/htdig/dhcp-hac
Hi,
Here are my findings from a previous attempt at compiling dhcp.
2011/2/16 Svante Signell
>
> I'm trying to get isc-dhcp (4.1.1-P1-16) to build under GNU/Hurd but
> have got into some problems with respect to configurations (in addition
> to the PATH_MAX stuff, I intended to
(Edited)
Forwarded Message
From: Svante Signell
To: debian-hurd maillist
Subject: Questions on isc-dhcp
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 21:33:42 +0100
Hi,
I'm trying to get isc-dhcp (4.1.1-P1-16) to build under GNU/Hurd but
have got into some problems with respect to configura
Hello,
information about dhcp in hurd seems to be outdated.. some sources suggest
tu use pfinet with --dhcp option but this one isnt implemented.. it would be
nice if someone who knows how to set this up correctly wrote a few steps how
to manage it.
thanks..
Jakub
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 04:25:47PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > > > if [ x$reason = xPREINIT ]; then
> > > > - settrans -afg /servers/socket/2 /hurd/pfinet --dhcp -i $interface
> > > >exit_with_hooks 0
>
> What about that --dhcp option? Not a b
k
anyways. It was just mentioned in the help text. I don't think that it
should be implemented, since `settrans -g' is thought for that, imho.
Besides that I slightly changed the behaviour of e.g. `pfinet -i eth2'
to automatically set up ip address `0.0.0.0' and dhcp routing.
Ther
On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 11:03:49PM +0200, Christian Dietrich wrote:
> * Stefan Siegl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Oct 15 2007 23:57] wrote:
> > > The whitespaces beetween -a and the ip are missing because -a, -g, -m,
> > > -p, -A, -G have only optional arguments. If the argument is no passed
> > > the valu
that.
> now '-a 192.168.100.1' '-a192.168.100.1' '-a' are possible
> so i didn't have to touch /etc/dhclient-script at all
> > > if [ x$reason = xPREINIT ]; then
> > > - settrans -afg /servers/socket/2 /hurd/pfinet --dhcp -i $interface
&
92.168.100.1' '-a192.168.100.1' '-a' are possible
so i didn't have to touch /etc/dhclient-script at all
> > if [ x$reason = xPREINIT ]; then
> > - settrans -afg /servers/socket/2 /hurd/pfinet --dhcp -i $interface
> >exit_with_hooks 0
> > fi
&g
Hello Christian,
On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 03:36:06PM +0200, Christian Dietrich wrote:
> hurd source package. In order to make the routing for the dhcp renew
> work. I do always add an route for 0.0.0.0 and the dhcp ports to the
> devices.
well, I haven't yet tested every change t
Hi,
this weekend i took Marco Gerards [1] as it is included in the debian
hurd source package. In order to make the routing for the dhcp renew
work. I do always add an route for 0.0.0.0 and the dhcp ports to the
devices.
But now, when the /etc/dhclient-script calls fsysopts it will override
all
> In that case I misunderstood you, sorry. What would be a better name?
Each option should describe what it does. If you are adding an option that
sets up routing in a way not described by -g, then give that option a name
saying what it actually does.
__
have an option to set the route in a way different from
> > what you can do with -g now, that still has nothing per se to do with DHCP.
> > Options are about what they do, not why you want that done.
>
> Right, but -g does not set the route like we need it for DHCP. I
> unders
Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Right, but -g does not set the route like we need it for DHCP. I
>> understand if you do not like the name of the option, but that does
>> not make it useless.
>
> I never said it was useless. I said it was p
> Right, but -g does not set the route like we need it for DHCP. I
> understand if you do not like the name of the option, but that does
> not make it useless.
I never said it was useless. I said it was poorly named. It probably also
overloads too many
.
>>
>> Which sets the gateway, how would that help?
>
> You said there was no existing facility for setting routes, which is what
> -g does. If you have an option to set the route in a way different from
> what you can do with -g now, that still has nothing per se to do wi
here was no existing facility for setting routes, which is what
-g does. If you have an option to set the route in a way different from
what you can do with -g now, that still has nothing per se to do with DHCP.
Options are about what they do, not why you want that done.
__
Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The most important part of the patch is setting up the route, for
>> which no interface or utility exists.
>
> There is -g.
Which sets the gateway, how would that help?
--
Marco
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
> Because without this patch, such things are not possible. Setting the
> address to 0.0.0.0 was not possible, but now it is.
Fine, so make that -a 0.0.0.0.
> The most important part of the patch is setting up the route, for
> which no interface or utility exists.
There is -g.
__
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 07:28:07PM +0200, Marco Gerards wrote:
> Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Your patch is very useful of course, I just think we do not need an
> > explicit --dhcp function but rather should make -a 0.0.0.0 [...] work
> > equivalently
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 01:51:53PM +0200, Marco Gerards wrote:
>> Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > As the DHCP script sets things to 0.0.0.0 anyway, I am a bit puzzled why
>> > this ha
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 02:15:44PM +0200, Marco Gerards wrote:
> Joachim Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > However, is there any way of making the patch a little bit more
> > generic? If anything, just to be able to remove the "dhcp"
> > connection th
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 01:51:53PM +0200, Marco Gerards wrote:
> Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > As the DHCP script sets things to 0.0.0.0 anyway, I am a bit puzzled why
> > this has to be a user-visable option.
>
> Because without this patch
Joachim Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd like to try it out but I'm still in the rebuilding phase of
> my "pick-up-the-hurd-hobby". However, is there any way of making
> the patch a little bit more generic? If anything, just to be able
> to rem
there any way of making
the patch a little bit more generic? If anything, just to be able
to remove the "dhcp" connection that I think Roland was against.
For example, automatic adding of zero route if IP is 0.0.0.0. So to
setup the iface for dhcp one would have to add call settrans with
i
e.
You need Marco's patch for SIOCGHWADDRINFO (or whatever it's called) to
get an IP from DHCP servers configured to hand out IPs only to PCs with
certain MAC addresses.
Besides that, it sort of works, but I experienced some freezes when
subsequently running dhclient again I could not tr
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Can you please tell me if the patch is ok like it is now or if I
>should change anything?
>
> Does it actually work? I recall that I tried it (might have been a
> older patch), and it didn't work for me.
It does for me. And if people don't
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
