Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 07:22:14 +0900 From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IPV6/KAME/protosw integration cleanup Message-ID: <y7v7kw8or55.wl@condor.jinmei.org> In-Reply-To: <4246.997609202@itojun.org> References: <4246.997609202@itojun.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> On Sun, 12 Aug 2001 18:40:02 +0900, >>>>> itojun@iijlab.net said: >> When KAME was added the mesh was less that perfect but there was so much to >> be done that some shortcuts needed to be taken. >> >> now that time has passed some of these can be cleaned up. >> >> 1/ Merging ipprotosw.h and protosw.h >> 2/ removal of all varargs stuff from the kernel >> (this revealing the mismatched prototypes they were hiding) >> removal of lotso warnings from the KAME stuff. > the change does add pain to KAME integration side on upgrades. > note that KAME codebase uses the same code across multiple *BSDs. > please don't do this. I tend to agree with itojun. Although I understand FreeBSD guys want to make code from KAME cleaner in terms of FreeBSD's own point of view, it will make future merge from KAME to FreeBSD harder. This is a trade-off issue, but at this moment, I think we'll still need further merge from KAME to FreeBSD, so I'd prefer keeping the code "as is" for a while. JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?y7v7kw8or55.wl>