Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:53:58 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Qing Li <qingli@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r204902 - in head/sys: net netinet Message-ID: <20100310175358.GB64044@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <9ace436c1003100946s2e8f5f1cx1adee809c25ea92d@mail.gmail.com> References: <201003090111.o291Bj79062503@svn.freebsd.org> <20100310152339.GA57873@dragon.NUXI.org> <201003101050.46696.jhb@freebsd.org> <20100310160858.GC58634@dragon.NUXI.org> <9ace436c1003100946s2e8f5f1cx1adee809c25ea92d@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 09:46:49AM -0800, Qing Li wrote: > > > > I looked at it, and at the diff of his original commit. The changes were > > large enough that I don't want to assume his patch takes care of all the > > issues given that patch hasn't been committed verbatim. > > The change itself is not a huge change but if you disagree, then > please be specific. I'm not disagreeing. I'm saying you and others that have worked in the routing code are the best judge. > The current mechanism and code is broken according to the original > design intention. But able to ping 127.0.0.1. :-) > When you say > "... made the kernel toxic" and "...I don't want to assume ...", well, > again, be specific instead about what you mean and give me details. A stock kernel cannot ping 127.0.0.1. It is claimed there is no route to 127.0.0.1. David Wolfskill has the same problem, as have others in the freebsd-current@ mailing list. I don't know about others, but not being able to connect to 127.0.0.1 totally breaks my installation. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100310175358.GB64044>