Re: Bug#616290: [Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp patch in ISC-Bugs #24697 (Debian Bug #616290)?]

2012-01-11 Thread Andrew Pollock
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 02:20:55PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > > So far our (Debian's) communications with dhcpd upstream on this topic > seem to be lacking in this area. If you like I would be happy to > review your next submissiosn to upstream, before you send them. I'm expecting to have a fac

Re: Bug#616290: [Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp patch in ISC-Bugs #24697 (Debian Bug #616290)?]

2012-01-21 Thread Andrew Pollock
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

Re: Bug#616290: [Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp patch in ISC-Bugs #24697 (Debian Bug #616290)?]

2012-01-21 Thread Andrew Pollock
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 01:12:15AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Andrew Pollock, le Sat 21 Jan 2012 15:57:50 -0800, a écrit : > > > - the PATH_MAX fix, which they _can_ check on GNU/Linux, since GNU/Linux > > > uses glibc. > > > > One of the concerns with this