* Stephan Hermann <s...@sourcecode.de> [Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 02:42:42PM +0200]: > On Tuesday, August 17, 2010 12:36:31 pm Michael Prokop wrote:
> > Sure. But just complaining doesn't help anyone. > > If neither > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=36;filename=0001-ipconfig- > > fix-infinite-loop.patch;att=1;bug=552554 nor > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=41;filename=0001-ipconfig- > > differentiate-between-error-and-non-DHCP-B.patch;att=1;bug=552554 address > > your issue (both from #552554) you should consider reporting your problem > > at least against klibc-utils with as much details as > > available so someone can reproduce and work on the issue. > Well, klibc upstream knows exactly how bad ipconfig is. > The question I'm raising is: > We could be able to replace ipconfig from klibc with something better suited, > like udhcpclient or whatever small footprintish dhcp client. > I think that's much better then to fight around with ipconfig. Well, right now we're in the freeze stage of squeeze and whatever different dhcp client alternative could be an option, besides having to proberly rewrite several lines of code inside the initramfs scripts (don't forget the scripts that aren't part of initramfs-tools itself) the switch might (and very probably would) bring up new problems and behaviour changes. That's nothing I can propose until squeeze is out. Thanks to the work by Julien BLACHE the situation of klibc-utils improved a lot with package version 1.5.20-1. If anyone still notices any problems WRT DHCP stuff in initramfs that's something we can and should address right now, but a switch isn't a good and valid option for now IMO. regards, -mika-
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature