From owner-cvs-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 18 01:30:22 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A5316A4B3; Sat, 18 Oct 2003 01:30:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (xorpc.icir.org [192.150.187.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F58E43FCB; Sat, 18 Oct 2003 01:30:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.9p1/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h9I8UKsd065799; Sat, 18 Oct 2003 01:30:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.9p1/8.12.3/Submit) id h9I8UK6r065798; Sat, 18 Oct 2003 01:30:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 01:30:19 -0700 From: Luigi Rizzo To: Murray Stokely Message-ID: <20031018013019.A58925@xorpc.icir.org> References: <200310180656.h9I6u2dx081671@repoman.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <200310180656.h9I6u2dx081671@repoman.freebsd.org>; from murray@freebsd.org on Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 11:56:02PM -0700 cc: doc-committers@freebsd.org cc: cvs-doc@freebsd.org cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en/releases/4.9R qa.sgml X-BeenThere: cvs-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the doc and www trees List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 08:30:22 -0000 On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 11:56:02PM -0700, Murray Stokely wrote: > murray 2003/10/17 23:56:02 PDT > > FreeBSD doc repository > > Modified files: > en/releases/4.9R qa.sgml > Log: > * Add a note that IPFW2 needs testing. The wording of this note could be improved -- as it is now, it sounds like a "don't use ipfw2", whereas the fix only affects "limit" rules, which is a mostly useless feature. I suggest changing it from +
  • A bug in IPFW2 was fixed very late in the release cycle. + Only the most basic ipfw2 features have been tested since the fix. + We are interested in hearing any feedback about IFPW2 in to +

  • A bug affecting IPFW2 "limit" rules was fixed very late in + the release cycle; other ipfw2 features should not be affected. + We are interested in hearing any feedback about IFPW2 in + 4.9-RC3.

  • cheers luigi