Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 19:29:23 -0500 From: Skip Ford <skip@menantico.com> To: Antoine Brodin <antoine@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MK_NETGRAPH and MK_ATM/MK_BLUETOOTH Message-ID: <20100111002923.GA1065@menantico.com> In-Reply-To: <f19c444a1001101220x57fcb25p26935b6b085e35db@mail.gmail.com> References: <f19c444a1001101220x57fcb25p26935b6b085e35db@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Antoine Brodin wrote: > I am looking at PR 137487, world broken WITHOUT_NETGRAPH. > Is it reasonable to have MK_NETGRAPH=no enforce MK_ATM=no and MK_BLUETOOTH=no? > The bluetooth stack is implemented using the netgraph framework. Some > bluetooth userland tools include netgraph headers or use netgraph > sockets. > There are 2 ATM stacks, netnatm and netgraph/atm. > netgraph/atm obviously uses netgraph. > For netnatm, this is not clear if there is a dependency: atmconfig(8) > includes netgraph headers and some files in sys/contrib/ngatm/netnatm > also include netgraph headers. For ATM, yes, it is reasonable to force MK_ATM to no if WITHOUT_NETGRAPH if defined, as natm as implemented requires netgraph. In theory, the native ATM stack should work w/out netgraph but not vice versa. Unfortunately, all ATM-related stacks and programs, including the old HARP stack that's now gone, were always hidden behind the same MK_ATM variable and nobody ever felt the need to split them, presumably because they always want ngatm and natm together. So, there really s/b a MK_NGATM which requires MK_ATM and a MK_ATM that doesn't need netgraph. If someone actually wants natm without ngatm someday, it can be fixed. I vote do it. -- Skip
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100111002923.GA1065>