Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 02:30:53 -0000 From: "Paul Webster" <paul.g.webster@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. (Copied from freebsd-pf) Message-ID: <op.wn1vxr1jjfousr@box.dlink.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
------------6lJAZgrOUxT2gRScunhKlF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Forward notice: I sent this to freebsd-pf originally and did not CC -current, but as the issue would affect current and the more opinions the better... I have sent it here too. -- Cheers, daemon -- original message Good day all, I am aware this is a much discussed subject since the upgrade of PF, I believe the final decision was that to many users are used to the old style pf and an upgrade to the new syntax would cause to much confusion. There was a recent debate on ##freebsd about this issue and I was inclined to mail in and get your opinions; basically it boiled down to the majority of users wanting either: 1) To move to the newer pf and just add to releases notes what had happened, and 2) my own personal opinion: creating 'pf2-*' as a kernel option tree, basically using the newer pf syntax and allowing users to choose. I would be interested to know the feedback from you guys as to be honest there seems to be quite a few users who actually DO want the new style format and functionality that comes with. I Attached the log of the conversation just for reference. -- Thank you for your time -- Paul G Webster 'daemon' Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ ------------6lJAZgrOUxT2gRScunhKlF Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=irc-snippet.txt Content-Type: text/plain; name="irc-snippet.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable * daemonik (~Adium@mail.originate.com) has joined ##freebsd <daemonik> Is the implementation of PF on FreeBSD up to date yet? <blakkheim> no * stormcrow (~phydeaux@c-24-126-183-121.hsd1.ga.comcast.net) has left ##= freebsd <blakkheim> and it won't ever be, we (retardedly) forked it with some ra= ndom guy's patches rather than updating it <wallshot> it's rare that that question asked about *any* part of the ba= se OS will be answered with "yes" <wallshot> doh. booo @ random patches <illuminated> blakkheim that was truly a stupid move <blakkheim> i agree <illuminated> any chance of getting them to 'take it back' <blakkheim> they think freebsd users are too stupid to adapt to the newe= r pf syntax and "thousands will upgrade without knowing and be left with= an unreachable system" or some bs like that <daemon> is there anything that pf can do that ipfw cannot do <blakkheim> check the freebsd-pf mailing list illuminated (or feel free = to post and complain) <daemonik> blakkheim: That's pretty damn . . wow <daemon> might be worth a few emails to all the lists asking for other u= sers to post into the pf list to support moving to the correct pf <daemon> maybe we can implement the newer pf as 'pf2' <daemonik> FreeBSD presently doesn't have ALTQ support included in the g= eneric kernel, correct? Is there an alternative to ALTQ? <blakkheim> daemon: i think so too <daemonik> daemon: Is it really that hard to shout in the appropriate pl= aces to properly inform users? What about release notes? Anybody who doe= sn't read release notes deserves what's coming to them. <blakkheim> that's what i said! * chrisb has learned to read MOVED and UPDATING closely <daemonik> Huh . . that kind of behavior is why no one respects anyone/t= hing associated with GNOME anymore . . <daemon> daemonik, I dont see it being that hard to use both the 'ramdon= guys patches' version of pf as the default for a few releases putting t= he newer version of pf as 'pf2' <daemon> therefor satisfying both channels of thought <daemon> there certainly should be A WAY of using the newer version <blakkheim> posting these thoughts to freebsd-pf@ is much more likely to= invoke a change (or at least a poll or something) than on irc <daemonik> daemon: No . . the noobs are the ones who should have to use = a pf-something. I bother to read the release notes, I want to use the co= rrect version of the software. Why should I have to suffer? Why should I= change when they're the ones who suck? * nightwalk has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) <daemonik> I'll make a post later tonight. I hope that others see these = messages and also articulate their thoughts on the mailing list. FreeBSD= should hold a high standard for something as important as PF. <daemon> daemonik, if you did read release notes you would see 'ad the n= ew version of pf is pf2' there is no need to upset users without cause; = as the 'patched' pf is the default for the tag 'pf' at the moment making= the new version 'pf2' is literally much more sane <daemon> and certainly a huge degree less antagonistic <SlitazMint> How do I find the size of a folder? <SlitazMint> And for that matter how do I search a man page? <blakkheim> du -sh dirname and use /string to search <SlitazMint> Thanks blakkheim <daemonik> I would rather read the release notes seeing that the WRONG v= ersion of PF gets deprecated to pf-legacy as it ought to be =97 knowing = that those who don't read the release notes will have a bad day. <daemonik> Referring to the CORRECT and latest stable version of PF as "= PF2" would make FreeBSD . . well, look about as incompetent as certain L= inux distros sometimes do to say the least. <daemon> daemonik, transistion time should always be taken into account = on any system; if we did was I was suggesting then 'pf' would be the new= version in -CURRENT but for later 9.x releases it would still have to b= e as I pointed out above <wallshot> i recall a number of features having 2 tagged to the name <wallshot> UFS2 for one <wallshot> or was it FFS2 <wallshot> and i think IPFW2 <daemon> its quite a common practice; sudeenly changing a major feature/= system is just generally what makes people cry <daemon> especially when it can be avoided with something as simple as a= dding a number to the end of the kernel tag <daemon> kernel option* ------------6lJAZgrOUxT2gRScunhKlF--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.wn1vxr1jjfousr>