Re: should FreeBSD-dhclient depend on FreeBSD-resolvconf?

On October 15, 2025 3:28:01 PM GMT+03:00, Lexi Winter <ivy@freebsd.org> wrote:
>Matteo Riondato wrote in <43B68BB6-02FA-470E-A8C5-99D15E3707D7@FreeBSD.org>:
>> > On Oct 15, 2025, at 8:16 AM, Lexi Winter <ivy@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>> > NB, "set-minimal-jail" is not intended to be the smallest possible set
>> > of packages for a jail; it's meant to be "minimal" (the basic base system)
>> > for jails.  so if dhclient use in jails is widespread, we should probably
>> > add it to minimal-jail.
> 
>> So does “minimal” really mean “typical”? 
> 
>no.  the project has no opinion on what a "typical jail" might contain.
>
>"minimal" is the minimal supported configuration for a multi-user UNIX
>system, i.e. the packages that people need to install to bring up a
>standard FreeBSD system and have things work as expected.
>
>"minimal-jail" is "minimal" without software that doesn't work in jails.
>dhclient obviously works in jails, but i ommitted it since i thought it
>was extremely uncommon to use dhclient in a jail.  but if this is more
>common than i thought, we can add it.

unsure how much we should add to minimal become it comes generic, usual or "maximal" (:p)

i run full separate networking in my otherwise shared fs non-pkgbase-yet ro-/ & ro-/usr/local jails with dynamic v4/v6 ip / dns assigns, so i indeed do run all of this

others might not. but dhclient is maybe small, we can afford adding it in and not have people cursing of large deps and ton of space

i think that ones who actually need full custom jails have passed the official sets anyway and created their own, just like i've done for my embedded things