From owner-freebsd-doc Sun Oct 27 0:24:39 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61DE437B401 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2002 00:24:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phoenix.welearn.com.au (phoenix.welearn.com.au [139.130.44.81]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4835D43E4A for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2002 00:24:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sue@welearn.com.au) Received: (from sue@localhost) by phoenix.welearn.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g9R7OSq21311 for freebsd-doc@freebsd.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2002 18:24:28 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from sue) Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 18:24:28 +1100 From: Sue Blake To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: IPFW doc inconsistency Message-ID: <20021027182427.S363@welearn.com.au> Mail-Followup-To: Sue Blake , freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The handbook says that the kernel must be rebuilt before IPFW can be used, but firewall(7) says that it is not essential to build a customer(sic) kernel. I suspect the former gives not quite the whole story, and the latter has a small typo. Maybe someone more knowledgeable could check whether I'm reading correctly and fix if necessary? -- Regards, -*Sue*- http://www.sievx.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message