Hello,
Chris Boot, on lun. 23 oct. 2017 09:22:29 +0100, wrote:
> 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 need
On 23.10.2017 09:36, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> 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?
Ubuntu has used dhclient fo
Just to rephrase my original request then...
Personally, I don't really care about the DHCP client used in d-i, but I
do care about complexity in the bind9 packaging.
The --without-openssl support will go away (probably in BIND 9.13) and I
would rather unify the two sets of libraries into one. If
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 actual
On 23 Oct 2017, at 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?
That's no
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?
Cheers,
--
Ondřej Surý
6 matches
Mail list logo
