Hi David on 11.07.2011 21:15, davidMbrooke wrote: > Hi, > > I am looking at updating dhcpd.lrp to add the option of IPv6 (i.e. > DHCPv6 Server) support. Right now we build dhcp.lrp from ISC DHCP 2.0pl5 > plus the -19.1 Debian patches, now more than 10 years old.
That is real old, I ported 3.x a long time ago to Bering, because I felt I needed it, the vanilla stuff was sufficient for me those days. > > IPv6 support was added in the ISC DHCP 4.x versions, so we need to > upgrade to at least 4.0 and ideally at least 4.1. The latest stable > upstream version is currently 4.2. > > I have some questions about how closely we should try to follow what > Debian does: > - Debian "squeeze" ships with ISC DHCP 4.1.1-P1-15+squeeze2 (i.e. > upstream 4.1.1-P1 with the -15+squeeze2 Debian patches. Should we > continue to apply the Debian patches or revert to the "vanilla" upstream > and remove the Debian changes? Again, what do these patches do? The way I understand the Debian way is, that they add patches to their source tree before committing fixes to upstream. While I understand that motive I'd rather stick to the vanilla version unless there is a real need to follow the Debian way (there may be other too though). > - Debian have changed the Package name to isc-dhcp-server, presumably > to distinguish it from other software options for a DHCP server (and to > distinguish it from -relay and -client). I was already thinking that > adding an "isc" prefix was a good idea before I found that Debian had > done it. However, if we do the same then "dhcpd.lrp" will become e.g. > "isc-dhcp-server.lrp" which may confuse some users. Do we have a name collision somewhere? Is there another dhcpd or dhcp package? Should we rather sack pump? <topic off> I am questioning a number of package decisions organically grown from the past. - dropbear vs. sshd suite (dropbear does not appear to support sftpd) - dnsmasq vs. djbdns suite and dhcp - pump vs. isc-dhcp client vs. dhcpcd there must be more of those... IMHO it would be beneficial to just support one single package to do a certain thing. If someone wants to build a package offering the same functionality, I would suggest to fork off a branch and see which one succeeds out in the wild. The main branch may loose :-( We could/should concentrate our forces on those packages, this makes the distribution more lean and will enable us to include more packages for other uses. It will also greatly improve the build of user interfaces. </topic off> cheers Erich
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2
_______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
