From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 28 17:18:54 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1AF0F6E; Thu, 28 May 2015 17:18:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hiren@strugglingcoder.info) Received: from mail.strugglingcoder.info (strugglingcoder.info [65.19.130.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1D68313; Thu, 28 May 2015 17:18:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hiren@strugglingcoder.info) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.1.1.3]) (Authenticated sender: hiren@strugglingcoder.info) by mail.strugglingcoder.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4AA9410D4BE; Thu, 28 May 2015 10:18:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 10:18:53 -0700 From: hiren panchasara To: d@delphij.net Cc: Patrick Kelsey , "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , delphij@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Looking for input on "locally patch tcpdump or merge in latest release from upstream?" Message-ID: <20150528171853.GU95600@strugglingcoder.info> References: <20150528045551.GS95600@strugglingcoder.info> <55674C6B.9050700@delphij.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KJvkvZqQCzHgjKcr" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55674C6B.9050700@delphij.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 17:18:54 -0000 --KJvkvZqQCzHgjKcr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 05/28/15 at 10:12P, Xin Li wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 >=20 > Hi, Hiren, >=20 > On 05/27/15 21:55, hiren panchasara wrote: > > On 05/28/15 at 12:40P, Patrick Kelsey wrote: > >> Hi, > >>=20 > >> I've had a patch for a capsicum-related issue in tcpdump sitting > >> around since last September (=20 > >> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2014-September/05 > 2049.html) > >> > >>=20 > that is still needed and that I want finally address in the tree (the pa > tch > >> was reviewed by rwatson@ and pjd@ back then). > >>=20 > >> This issue was patched separately in the upstream tcpdump sources > >> in February (=20 > >> https://github.com/the-tcpdump-group/tcpdump/commit/887bf88fd058f8c0e > f9a5af1a95b43753e3ad2eb), > >> > >>=20 > along with a refactor of the associated capsicum code, and that work has > >> been present in tcpdump releases since 4.7.3 (=20 > >> http://www.tcpdump.org/tcpdump-changes.txt). > >>=20 > >> The last tcpdump release imported into the FreeBSD tree was 4.6.2 > >> ( http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/vendor/tcpdump/). > >>=20 > >> tcpdump release import/merges have recently resulted in some > >> confusion/lost local patches due to the extent of the diffs > >> (e.g., the thread at=20 > >> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head/2015-February/067853 > .html). > >> > >> > >>=20 > I see three possible ways to proceed: > >>=20 > >> 1. Apply the minimal-local-diff patch from last September to our > >> local tcpdump sources. This seems like it might contribute to a > >> future difficult/lossy tcpdump vendor import/merge. > >>=20 > >> 2. Import tcpdump 4.7.3 or later to address this issue. Are > >> there any reasons why this might not be desired? I don't have a > >> feel for when/why past tcpdump vendor imports have been performed > >> or avoided. > >>=20 > >> 3. Cherry-pick the upstream patch and apply it to our local > >> sources, directly addressing only this issue and avoiding future > >> tcpdump vendor import/merge problems related to this issue. > >>=20 > >> I'm looking for input on the above. If left to my own devices, > >> I'd go with (3). > >=20 > > Latest upstream release is 4.7.4 and the one before that was 4.6.2 > > which we already have in the tree. I think we should get latest > > instead of picking bits and pieces when possible. > >=20 > > CCing Xin for his input as he has been doing last few imports. >=20 > Yes, I think we should do the new import. (Are you willing to do > that? I'm doing it only because nobody else were doing it...) I think Patrick volunteered to do the import. If he can't, I'll do it. Cheers, Hiren --KJvkvZqQCzHgjKcr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (FreeBSD) iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJVZ038XxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRBNEUyMEZBMUQ4Nzg4RjNGMTdFNjZGMDI4 QjkyNTBFMTU2M0VERkU1AAoJEIuSUOFWPt/lioIH/ia2GJouELpIFgfea60Un3s1 L7lNOxqGxQSY9xowPv/n9GS1UMNb2PPuUhgCyuaEZKA5OxIR2J/1+rI0FNKHa8x4 sb5VSvcYC+U5xmmPIGRfQMmGn9WBcb9lI9U5eJQAmPjB8tZhezU4LsY07zGPM2Oh pz/m+FE46wqxwx9HBekjLAox19UpfAErj2S+FFSzdu/tXKy2AafCo61Tc6fFkzZ9 nMKk1IsKNvRD883o7HZWROUwOfmQ9a1BQoeTc87SH0ixuw2KiNSj098fMi1PguE3 NN1B89iZpNXgahu8IYYXxa38X9cxwRZAdzxOYoRwdy9kO4kTOjn5FwsaR3sMSts= =qXmK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KJvkvZqQCzHgjKcr--