Hello Robie, I've validated that the package from -proposed works well, testing in my VM based environment. I haven't tested it on Oracle bare metal (where the original issue happened) as that is a type of instance hard to get access to. Given that the test packages had proven to fix the original problem that we were targetting to address, I believe the package from -proposed should also work well. Let me know if it is necessary to also test that it addresses the original issue with Oracle BM host and I'll get access to one and validate.
Regarding your question below: > ...would it be practical and/or useful to verify that, with a timeout of 2s, a DHCP reply sent after 1.5s works, but a DHCP reply sent after 2.5s does not? That has been addressed in comment #30 (and now also in #39 with the package from -proposed). Regarding your question if upstream had accepted the patch, I would have to defer that to Khaled, but I also agree that it seems a deliberate upstream design decision not to accept it. Regarding your comment below: > In Ubuntu, we might decide to maintain the patch as a delta but then drop that delta in subsequent releases when we no longer need that functionality. That is indeed just needed for Bionic. To confirm/clarify my understanding, if this moves to -updates, in theory this is not going to be reverted (from Bionic) in the future, right? Once it lands there, it is expected that any newer klibc-utils packages that gets released to Bionic will continue to carry this patch? Thank you in advance! Regards, Fabio Martins -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1947099 Title: ipconfig does not honour user-requested timeouts in some cases To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/klibc/+bug/1947099/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
