Report information
The Basics
Id:
29402
Status:
resolved
Priority:
Medium/Medium
Queue:

BugTracker
Version Fixed:
(no value)
Version Found:
(no value)
Versions Affected:
(no value)
Versions Planned:
4.4.0
Priority:
P0 Critical
Severity:
S2 Normal
CVSS Score:
(no value)
CVE ID:
(no value)
Component:
(no value)
Area:
(no value)

Dates
Created:Tue, 15 May 2012 18:52:23 -0400
Updated:Tue, 12 Dec 2017 07:40:59 -0500
Closed:Sun, 23 Oct 2016 02:57:01 -0400



This bug tracker is no longer active.

Please go to our Gitlab to submit issues (both feature requests and bug reports) for active projects maintained by Internet Systems Consortium (ISC).

Due to security and confidentiality requirements, full access is limited to the primary maintainers.

CC: services@isc.org
Subject: DHCP footprint
We have a critical issue with the flash memory footprint of DHCP tools on SD-B4s which needs client, CRA (relay) and server binaries. The easiest way to solve this is to convert the Makefiles to libtool. I tried: it is easy, I put the diffs (one from rcs diff, the other from the bind library sub directory) in attachments. PS: note most of the files are generated so I stripped them from the diffs. I don't know if cltest.c really requires a patch. PPS: put severity normal as it is not really a bug, priority critical as we need it for in 4 months (- integration, test, etc).
Subject: dhcp+lt

Message body not shown because it is not plain text.

Subject: dhcp.bind+lt

Message body not shown because it is not plain text.

On Tue Jan 13 15:38:12 2015, fdupont wrote:
> => can you check you have the rt29402b branch
> from repo.isc.org/proj/git/prod/dhcp?
>
> > 1. util/bind.sh - does not have logic for tags beyond 4.2.5
>
> => it is not what I can see from my util/bind.sh?
>
> > 2. configure.ac - version number is incorrect.
>
> => I didn't change it (and it is 4.3.2.pre-beta).
>
> > 3. Why are the bind directories not relative? When one builds master
> > (i.e 4.3.2), the bind directories in the Make process are all relative as
> > shown
>
> => for compatibility with the with-libbind option,
> because it is simpler (same name in all levels) and
> IMHO safer. And BTW it doesn't really matter.
>
> > For rt29402a, they are prefixed with the expanded value of "--prefix"
> > supplied to config, as you can see:
>
> => rt29402a was wrong for this point.
>
> > 4. Compilation fails on common/ns_names.c:
>
> => so I am really convinced you tried the wrong branch.

Indeed I did use the wrong branch, my apologies.  Let me try again with the correct one.