From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 11 21:53:32 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 831A3106564A for ; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:53:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cryx-freebsd@h3q.com) Received: from mail.h3q.com (mail.h3q.com [213.73.89.199]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C11A58FC1D for ; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:53:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cryx-freebsd@h3q.com) Received: (qmail 86756 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2008 21:53:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO goa.local) (smtpsend@85.179.28.10) by mail.h3q.com with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 11 Dec 2008 21:53:29 -0000 Message-ID: <49418BD9.8080105@h3q.com> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 22:53:29 +0100 From: Philipp Wuensche User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Macintosh/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bseklecki@collaborativefusion.com References: <20081201085229.D80401@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <20081201122937.81475f0zhfsjya4o@webmail.leidinger.net> <6ae50c2d0812021800x791d2cfeh45d590de120f76df@mail.gmail.com> <1228483574.2805.499.camel@soundwave.ws.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com> <86skp2l804.fsf@ds4.des.no> <1228507529.2805.539.camel@soundwave.ws.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com> In-Reply-To: <1228507529.2805.539.camel@soundwave.ws.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: FreeBSD virtualization mailing list , Alexander Leidinger , alexus , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, =?UTF-8?B?RGFnLUVybGluZyBTbcO4cmdyYXY=?= , "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: r185435 multi-IPv4/v6/no-IP jails in HEAD X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:53:32 -0000 Brian A. Seklecki wrote: > On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 20:47 +0100, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: >> The question is, does it change existing behavior, or just add new >> functionality? > > The syntax semantics should be backward compatible, so likely the > latter. Not entirely true, the jls output is totaly different than before and breaks third-party applications like jailaudit and ezjail. It is uneasy to parse too. greetings, Philipp