Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
While the dhcp4 and dhcp6 servers in the old ISC DHCP package have been replaced with KEA, the same is not true for dhcp-relay which is not part of KEA. Dropping dhcp-relay from RHEL/CentOS 10 is a bummer and we should at least keep it in EPEL. Note that only dhcp-relay (and dhcp-common) are needed, but branching the whole of dhcp is fine if that's easier. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: NA Actual Results: NA Expected Results: NA NA
Thanks for opening Bugzilla for this! Yes, I will add the whole dhcp into EPEL10 in the upcoming days.
work in progress; still not decided whether to drop dhcp server and leave there only dhclient (I was planning to add it into EPEL10 at some point) and dhcrelay
I have multiple tests unable to proceed in rhel10, because they rely on dhclient and we do not have any build of that. It would be useful to have at least epel builds for testing dhcp clients. Working with dhclient is much simpler than configuring fake namespaces and using NetworkManager with them. I admit dnsmasq can provide some relay functionality, but dhcrelay seems much more mature. It would be great to have those tools compiled at least in epel. Is it not certain whether some parts of dhcp component would be still supported in RHEL 10?
Hi Phil, Please, would you be able to test the following scratch build whether the dhcrelay works for you? https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=130968126 It's a testing build from the attached PR: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dhcp/pull-request/9# I would like to test it for any problems first before merging and building it for EPEL.
Thanks for doing this! I spun this up in a VM to do some basic testing The binary is functional, however the package has (obviously) the same flaws as the Fedora package - it's not quite usable out of the box (I should have filed a bug for that, sorry): dhcrelay is only configurable through command-line options, and the Unit file the ships in fedora has no EnvironmentFile in order to specify them. In fact, it is _required_ you pass in at least one DHCP server to ARGV. As a work-around, on my system, I add a drop-in that looks like: ``` [Service] EnvironmentFile=-/etc/sysconfig/dhcrelay ExecStart= ExecStart=/usr/sbin/dhcrelay -d --no-pid $OPTIONS $SERVERS ``` And then in sysconfig I do: ``` OPTIONS="-iu eth0 -id eth1" SERVERS="192.168.1.10" ``` Anyway - the EPEL package is as functional the Fedora one, and as shown above, not hard to get into actual working order.
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-af25d08783 (dhcp-4.4.3-23.el10_1) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 10.1. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-af25d08783
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-af25d08783 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.1 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-af25d08783 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-af25d08783 (dhcp-4.4.3-23.el10_1) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.1 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.