Date: 18 Jan 2000 08:25:19 -0800 From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) To: sumikawa@ebina.hitachi.co.jp Cc: itojun@iijlab.net, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IPv6-enable ports Message-ID: <vqc901nny8g.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: sumikawa@ebina.hitachi.co.jp's message of "Sun, 9 Jan 2000 02:38:34 %2B0900 (JST)" References: <vqcaemhdo8x.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <23769.947339891@coconut.itojun.org> <200001081738.CAA16033@prince.net.ebina.hitachi.co.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* From: sumikawa@ebina.hitachi.co.jp
* In some cases, USE_INET6 is necessary because ports-current support
* both of 3-STABLE and current tree now.
*
* For example, in ports/net/zebra, ospf6d and ripngd, which are IPv6
* routing daemon modules, are not installed by 'configure' detection on
* 3-STABLE environment. We need to prepare the difference PLISTs on
* 3-STABLE and current. It's like the relation between aout and elf in
* past days.
Yes, but the difference is that, today, we know that 3-stable is IPv4
only while 4-current has IPv6. You can easily distinguish them with
${OSVERSION}.
I don't think we need USE_INET6 unless you want people to be able to
compile ports in -current without IPv6 support (and I already said I
don't see a need for that, or rather, I don't want you guys to spend
too much time on something like that).
-PW
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?vqc901nny8g.fsf>