[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Bug#616290: [Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp patch

From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: Bug#616290: [Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp patch in ISC-Bugs #24697 (Debian Bug #616290)?]
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 00:42:06 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21+34 (58baf7c9f32f) (2010-12-30)

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 
> > week,
> > and the Hurd situation is one of the topics of discussion. If the 
> > stakeholders
> > from debian-hurd want me to convey anything in particular, then now's the 
> > time
> > to speak up.
> So, did you have the opportunity to discuss with ISC about it?

Ah, Pino pointed me at your planet.debian.org post.

I have to say I'm a bit surprised that the patch generates so much
discussion around it, but not about its content.  Did they see my
updated patch with comments?  There are basically three things in it:

- the PATH_MAX fix, which they _can_ check on GNU/Linux, since GNU/Linux
uses glibc.
- the get_hw_addr changes, which does not actually change any code,
but simply uses existing code in a case which would not even compile
- the bind change, which just makes GNU/Hurd use the same thing as

So in the end, the first part is not trivial but can be checked on Linux
(and actually fixes a bug), and the second and third part look trivial
to me, thus the wonder.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]