From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 20 01:25:36 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2558016A4CE for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:25:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.vicor-nb.com (bigwoop.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D3F543D39 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:25:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from elischer.org (julian.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.97]) by mail.vicor-nb.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E81EF7A401; Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:25:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4125530F.7020104@elischer.org> Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:25:35 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030516 X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer References: <412550A0.4090805@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <412550A0.4090805@elischer.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: John Polstra Subject: Re: netgraph only on i386/ia64 - why ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:25:36 -0000 I made the commit but we can still change param.h if people really want it.. Julian Elischer wrote: > > > John Polstra wrote: > >> I dropped scottl and re from the cc list, since they're busy and asked >> us to work it out on our own. >> >> On 20-Aug-2004 Julian Elischer wrote: >> >> >>> Ok so what is the next number that should be used? >>> it's currently #define __FreeBSD_version 600000 >>> >>> 600001? >>> >> >> >> Yes, that would be the next number. I question whether >> __FreeBSD_version needs to be bumped at all, though, since the >> change is already reflected in NG_VERSION and NG_ABI_VERSION. Any >> port that uses netgraph would be compiled against the header files >> on the system, so I can't see how it would be useful to change >> __FreeBSD_version for this. (Not that I feel very strongly about it.) >> > > I sort of agree.. > We protect ourselves.. we needn't bump the FreeBSD version I don't > think.. > If you have a good reason for it I'll do it but I don't think it is > required.. No port will be compiled > with different options because of this.. > I mean 5.3 and 6.0 will already have a netgraph recompile required.. > >> >> >> >>> here's a cut-n-paste version.. for comment.. >>> it's ready to commit. >>> >> >> >> Thanks for taking this on. I haven't tested it, but it looks good. >> Just one nit: "align" is misspelled as "allign" in the UPDATING entry. >> >> John >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"