From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 31 06:18:17 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 255B0106566B; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 06:18:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from qing.li@bluecoat.com) Received: from whisker.bluecoat.com (whisker.bluecoat.com [216.52.23.28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 091448FC0C; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 06:18:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from qing.li@bluecoat.com) Received: from bcs-mail03.internal.cacheflow.com ([10.2.2.95]) by whisker.bluecoat.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id mBV6IE8T029866; Tue, 30 Dec 2008 22:18:15 -0800 (PST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 22:18:44 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: HEADSUP: arp-v2 has been committed Thread-Index: Aclpr6yJwObcoU6mQNmwNb7Ozx71+QBW+YpQ References: <20081227202117.F3B14341A3@cavin02.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be><200812281613.49404.tijl@ulyssis.org> From: "Li, Qing" To: "Gerald Pfeifer" , "Tijl Coosemans" , "Qing Li" Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: RE: HEADSUP: arp-v2 has been committed X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 06:18:17 -0000 Hi, >=20 > > If it's easy to reintroduce it and become backwards compatible I > > would do it. Like Julian said, you can give it the value 0. It > > would be nice if the kernel tested for the old value as well, > > perhaps behind an #ifdef COMPAT_FREEBSD*. That way when people > > upgrade to FreeBSD 8 all their ports compiled under FreeBSD 7 > > keep working. >=20 > What of this will be doable, Qing? I guess Tijl and me need to > understand when/whether/what to submit to Wine upstream... >=20 I don't think we can provide binary compatibility without putting back RTF_LLINFO exactly as it was. My preference is to continue down=20 the new path without RTF_LLINFO. We still have some time before the 8.0 release. It's straightforward for me to retain some of the RTF_LLINFO support in the new kernel if and when the situation becomes necessary. >>>=20 >>> I believe all of the affected ports have been updated to=20 >>> include the conditional blocks around RTF_LLINFO. So=20 >>> there is still a level of compatibility, right ? >> Yes, and I'm OK with this. It's just that this makes FreeBSD 8 >> a special case. >=20 > Agreed. > Since the affected ports now have the conditional code around RTF_LLINFO,=20 the updates would allow these ports to compile in both -current and in the=20 previous releases. Let's go with this approach.=20 Thanks, -- Qing