| 1 |
El dom, 08-07-2012 a las 21:06 -0400, Anthony G. Basile escribió: |
| 2 |
> On 07/08/2012 08:57 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:29:35 +0200 |
| 4 |
> > Pacho Ramos<pacho@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> >> El dom, 08-07-2012 a las 21:49 +0200, Diego Elio Pettenò escribió: |
| 7 |
> >>> Il 08/07/2012 20:13, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn ha scritto: |
| 8 |
> >>>> Please report a removal bug for this, so any issues concerning |
| 9 |
> >>>> users of netkit-tftp can be tracked. |
| 10 |
> >>> Here it is: |
| 11 |
> >>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=425362 |
| 12 |
> >>> |
| 13 |
> >>> And actually Robin K. who submitted the overflow bug I fixed, |
| 14 |
> >>> pointed out that there _are_ cases where hpa doesn't work but |
| 15 |
> >>> netkit does, so I've downgraded the removal to a simple masking for |
| 16 |
> >>> bad code. |
| 17 |
> >>> |
| 18 |
> >>> I guess we'll wait a bit more before removing this, in the mean time |
| 19 |
> >>> though I don't really feel happy with leaving it unmasked so it'll |
| 20 |
> >>> stay as it is. |
| 21 |
> >>> |
| 22 |
> >> If its upstream is completely dead, it has bad code and it has a |
| 23 |
> >> replacement, I would still go to treeclean it |
| 24 |
> > But if it provides the only means to netboot certain hardware, then you |
| 25 |
> > might think twice. |
| 26 |
> > |
| 27 |
> > |
| 28 |
> > jer |
| 29 |
> > |
| 30 |
> I have several ubiquity routerstations (the hardware in questions) and |
| 31 |
> I've asked Robin Kauffman to report the steps to reproduce in the bug. |
| 32 |
> I'll try to get to the bottom of why tftp-hpa doesn't work. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> --Tony |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
I thought it has a replacement, if not, ok to keep |
Archives