 Relationships |
|
| Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account | 11-10-2008 11:09 PST |
| Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Docs |
| Viewing Issue Simple Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ View Advanced ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||||
| ID | Category | Severity | Reproducibility | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||||
| 0001148 | [udhcp] | minor | always | 01-09-07 08:08 | 02-12-08 12:50 | ||||
| Reporter | mysterio | View Status | public | ||||||
| Assigned To | |||||||||
| Priority | normal | Resolution | no change required | ||||||
| Status | closed | ||||||||
| Summary | 0001148: dhcp option rootpath should be root-path | ||||||||
| Description |
The provided option rootpath of udhcpc/d isn't complaint with the RFC. This option should be renamed to root-path which is the official name. So far as I know, one line only has to be changed in option.c. |
||||||||
| Additional Information | |||||||||
| Attached Files | |||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Relationships |
|
|
Notes |
|
|
(0004274) vda 02-12-08 12:50 |
Why should option names be exactly like in RFC? They affect only config file and command line of udhcp, and admin is supposed to make sure [s]he uses correct spelling _for this utility_. |
|
Issue History |
|||
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
| 01-09-07 08:08 | mysterio | New Issue | |
| 02-12-08 12:50 | vda | Status | new => closed |
| 02-12-08 12:50 | vda | Note Added: 0004274 | |
| 02-12-08 12:50 | vda | Resolution | open => no change required |
| Copyright © 2000 - 2006 Mantis Group |  |
