Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:59:42 +0200 From: Josua Mayer <josua.mayer97@gmail.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: routed && route6d removal proposal Message-ID: <48b43bd5-4a20-c69c-77bb-1ed258bb8664@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <33c892bf-5d71-cd65-3041-449cc1bf6e6b@grosbein.net> References: <202006221926.05MJQJwC011867@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> <33c892bf-5d71-cd65-3041-449cc1bf6e6b@grosbein.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
\o everybody, this is just a little sidenote from an outsider: Isn't below remark a good reason to remove something from base? Like - would the bugfix have been available quicker if it had been in a port? Would the reporter have actually tested the fix in that case? Am 22.06.20 um 22:33 schrieb Eugene Grosbein: > 23.06.2020 2:26, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: >>> I'm not talking about RIPv2 inherent deficiencies. >>> Our routed just glitches where quagga's ripd just works. >> >> And your PR# for reporting the bug is? > > Was. https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51927 > Never had a chance to verify if it was really fixed in HEAD because it was not for RELENG_4, > so I moved to ripd. As you may remeber, RELENG_5 needed much time to become ready for production. > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48b43bd5-4a20-c69c-77bb-1ed258bb8664>