Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:56:51 +0800 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: "K. Macy" <kmacy@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> Subject: Re: No IPFW binary compat across versions ? Message-ID: <CAJ-Vmo=0rREaakQ7p93fBccFJEuGT47LdFkiazD0QDUMHytf=w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAHM0Q_NvO4Ci5YKx2CO1UmsiV4k9CeDdyUjbtz1kFNNOTWwscw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CACqU3MXVLjJvF6RGqpC-hvnbTgb-uNC7V0AP0ofXDRs4n7Nmtg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHM0Q_N0UZu0tvqL6TiCOmJfHAt4sBtWM1abE%2BuJPS9ubARrfg@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MUjjYXabmYZtivDQKJ2v6HcWyo1_3AuTyyjN1o5%2BV6hhg@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MVvgftNMrGnoPaXB-MwyDqMc4jLd3qPWj9YEYdN3fJyyA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-Vmon464X%2BVh6=Ofiwnkt%2BAnmGysJAOsEiKxAkZ90tndGo7g@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MWToUAKPMLGYfkHgZkCqvnjJF=jkvqYV-PTieP9x96nrg@mail.gmail.com> <4E656D30.3040905@FreeBSD.org> <CACqU3MX6SKepfhvQ8Tzv68ykgUOUz0qFXeoL1jCY_chKGMTAvA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHM0Q_NvO4Ci5YKx2CO1UmsiV4k9CeDdyUjbtz1kFNNOTWwscw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Try running an updated udev on an older kernel, because you're using PVM virtualisation but don't want to deal with the latest kernels. Useless, but all the current distributions use the latest udev, so require up to date kernels. A bunch of linux stuff "works" across large swaths of time because a bunch of those things are text files in /proc. FreeBSD could do this for a variety of things, but: * someone has to do the legwork (define a public API and versioning scheme for it), then write the code, then convert the utilities, then handle backwards compatibility (eg by providing read-only methods for earlier API versions, defining what the default behaviour should be for older versions that are missing the newer features) * someone has to champion getting it into the tree * someone has to keep it up to date Just please keep in mind the current method (hi KVM access) allows for things like reading the current routing table from a crashdump using the same tools you're using on a live system. You'd likely have to come up with a unified API for accessing both live data and crashed kernel data. That's not out of the question, it'll just take some time.) If you'd like to do it, I bet everyone will cheer you on. Honest :) Adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmo=0rREaakQ7p93fBccFJEuGT47LdFkiazD0QDUMHytf=w>