Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:57:44 +0100 From: "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@punkt.de> To: drosih@rpi.edu Cc: stable@freebsd.org, glebius@freebsd.org, julian@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [heads up] axing AppleTalk and IPX/SPX Message-ID: <D302C7E2-64A4-4E32-9A4A-1CA7A7685C1B@punkt.de> In-Reply-To: <201310281648.r9SGmlQQ008874@smtp10.server.rpi.edu> References: <201310281648.r9SGmlQQ008874@smtp10.server.rpi.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, all, Am 28.10.2013 um 17:49 schrieb drosih@rpi.edu: > I notice that CAP was removed from the ports collection some time ago, > and that there didn't seem to be any objections to that. So that's > some more indication that appletalk isn't seeing much use. I=92d guess the main reason is that Apple and Novell had enough = foresight to make their proprietary file sharing and printing protocols run over = IP. And for Apple this has been the case, since when? System 7.5.? Earlier, = even? I=92m curious what it is your are running in sufficient numbers to make = Appletalk mandatory? > As far as the kernel-level support, I assume you're just removing all > the code tied to the kernel options NETATALK and NETATALKDEBUG? Or = does > it entail some other changes, which might wreck my custom compile of = CAP? IIRC - and I used to use CAP a lot - it uses BPF to get the interface = into promiscuous mode and does all of the protocol itself. So as long as the upcoming = changes do not touch the BPF API, you should be fine. Kind regards Patrick --=20 punkt.de GmbH * Kaiserallee 13a * 76133 Karlsruhe Tel. 0721 9109 0 * Fax 0721 9109 100 info@punkt.de http://www.punkt.de Gf: J=FCrgen Egeling AG Mannheim 108285
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?D302C7E2-64A4-4E32-9A4A-1CA7A7685C1B>