Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2014 18:48:29 +0000 From: Peter Maxwell <peter@allicient.co.uk> To: "freebsd-pf@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pf@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why merging recent OpenBSD PF code is not easy (was Re: FOLLOW-UP) Message-ID: <CA%2BaY-u6N26QWMCV4vHiprno_wF3rzSgj8LY3jtHoyLKUzmBsgA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <473461417967573@web11h.yandex.ru> References: <363021417833295@web21g.yandex.ru> <20141207111233.GQ44537@home.opsec.eu> <473461417967573@web11h.yandex.ru>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 7 December 2014 at 15:52, Martin Hanson <greencoppermine@yandex.com> wrote: > > > Did anyone on FreeBSD bother to look at that first? > > Multi-threading!? > > So okay, now there's essentially another product on FreeBSD, its NOT PF any > longer! It's "old crap that should have been updated some six years ago" > with > new multi-threading support! And then some fixes here and there by a single > guy, or two guys. > > Bad decisions don't become right just because you sugar coat them with some > new flavor. > > All we need now is a new name, how about fpf (f***ed, PF?). Sorry. > Given you appear to believe you are well acquainted with the problem, why not pull your finger out of your proverbial and sort it yourself?home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2BaY-u6N26QWMCV4vHiprno_wF3rzSgj8LY3jtHoyLKUzmBsgA>