[Bug 2024] A patch to support additional parameter passing via DHCP

[bugzilla-daemon at rtems.org]

https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2024

--- Comment #3 from Ric Claus <claus at SLAC.Stanford.edu> 2012-02-27 12:06:42 CST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> The addition of vendor options with a callback is nice. I do have some
> questions.
> 
> 1. The call dhcp_init has changed and I suspect this could break existing user
> code. Should the dhcp_init call remain the same a new call added, eg
> dhcp_init_ex or dhcp_init_vendor ?

Yes, on the face of it, I would agree.  Perhaps dhcp_init could be a jacket
around dhcp_init_ex...

> 
> 2.
> https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1438&action=diff#a/cpukit/libnetworking/rtems/rtems_dhcp.c_sec24
> : What are the '& 1' and '& 2' bits handling ? I would rather see define labels
> for the bits.

Did you mean at here?
https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1438&action=diff#a/cpukit/libnetworking/rtems/rtems_dhcp.c_sec31

Yes, Iagree, but would have to look into it.  However, it's that way in the
original, if we're talking about the same thing.

> 
> 3.
> https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1438&action=diff#a/cpukit/libnetworking/rtems/rtems_dhcp.c_sec37
> : Is this a new feature to  handle more interfaces ?

Yes, that's what we used it for.  I can provide example usage code and
dhcp.conf snipptes, if you're interested.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.