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

On October 16, 2025 1:29:51 AM GMT+03:00, Chris <bsd-lists@bsdforge.com> wrote:
>On 2025-10-15 05:16, Lexi Winter wrote:
>> Ronald Klop wrote in <324231230.147694.1760527890049@localhost>:
>>> Yesterday I installed a 15-BETA1 jail using pkgbase
>>> FreeBSD-set-minimal-jail.  I was missing FreeBSD-dhclient which is
>>> fine and I installed it. Then it didn't have DNS as FreeBSD-resolvconf
>>> was missing.  I understand that theoretically dhclient can operate
>>> without resolvconf, but in practice they seem pretty useful together.
>>> 
>>> Should FreeBSD-dhclient depend on FreeBSD-resolvconf?
>> 
>> dhclient should depend on resolvconf and i will fix this.
>> 
>> i am curious how widespread dhclient use in jails is.  should we add
>> dhclient to set-minimal-jail?
>> 
>> 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.
>IMHO isn't the HOST responsible for routing? Doesn't that make dhclient
>and friends somewhat unusual (not average jail(8) setup?).
>

in jail, host does all the routing anyway, it's within same kernel

but one might need isolated virtual networks

since admins are humans, they might need a way to make this appear sane and understandable. unfortunately this needs dhcpd, dhclient, rtadvd, rtsold, ra in same host

it all makes things bit more bloaty. or a lot. but you get it  more easily

i don't know how this could be changed to kernel doesn't need to do networking with itself which is wtf

but virtual networking is a think. vale switches, epairs+bridges. in fact whole vm is technological wtf but it's so handy

i don't have solution to this, how to make it technically better but still understandable to humans. all i could think is just run dhclient and swap that meg of ram out or so if needed

this doesn't matter here too. dhclient works in jail. it has legit use. so if minimal jail is a set of all packages that work in jail. let it all be in

on naming, i don't have opinion here. i never confuse things. others might. but then, minimal needs change? unfortuntely you don't do changes like this. minimal set is already advertised and this will bite users who already use it

tho, i admit i misread it at first too. because i take minimal as reduced fbsd. i build my own embedded dists, i call them min or minimal, because i took things away from fbsd base and minimized it

but at it, if it's minimal working fbsd, unsure. besides there's no confusion where it comes from, if from project, then all know