On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 04:01:40PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> Andrew Pollock wrote:
> >As I've said previously, I'd rather not make the downstream DHCP package
> >deviate significantly in behaviour from the upstream software. I don't
> >particularly like having magical strings that are interpretted differently
> >to literal strings. I'd rather see it be a directive than a magical string
> >that gets special treatment. According to upstream, their config parser
> >can't cope with that concept though.
> >
> >>And what are other distributions doing?
> >
> >Not sure, I haven't looked. Why don't you and let me know?
> >
> >I suggest you lobby upstream to implement the functionality, as I have
> >been.
> >
> >http://marc.info/?l=dhcp-users&m=120027890132057&w=4
>
> Upstream appears to prefer a solution that accepts the pipe output of
> applications for values in the conf file.
> Such a solution doesn't exist yet, so I think it's best to apply the
> Ubuntu patch until there's a better solution.
>
And then what? We have a behaviour change to deal with? This is one of the
reasons why I don't like making distribution packages differ in behaviour
and functionality from upstream.
As it happens, I had lunch with a bunch of the DHCP folks from ISC
yesterday. I discussed this particular feature with them (again). They have
feature releases and point releases. The only way this will get into
upstream is in another feature release.
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 04:01:40PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: marc.info/ ?l=dhcp- users&m= 120027890132057 &w=4
> Andrew Pollock wrote:
> >As I've said previously, I'd rather not make the downstream DHCP package
> >deviate significantly in behaviour from the upstream software. I don't
> >particularly like having magical strings that are interpretted differently
> >to literal strings. I'd rather see it be a directive than a magical string
> >that gets special treatment. According to upstream, their config parser
> >can't cope with that concept though.
> >
> >>And what are other distributions doing?
> >
> >Not sure, I haven't looked. Why don't you and let me know?
> >
> >I suggest you lobby upstream to implement the functionality, as I have
> >been.
> >
> >http://
>
> Upstream appears to prefer a solution that accepts the pipe output of
> applications for values in the conf file.
> Such a solution doesn't exist yet, so I think it's best to apply the
> Ubuntu patch until there's a better solution.
>
And then what? We have a behaviour change to deal with? This is one of the
reasons why I don't like making distribution packages differ in behaviour
and functionality from upstream.
As it happens, I had lunch with a bunch of the DHCP folks from ISC
yesterday. I discussed this particular feature with them (again). They have
feature releases and point releases. The only way this will get into
upstream is in another feature release.
regards
Andrew