From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 11 00:22:10 2010 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 0324E106566C for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:22:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from skip@menantico.com) Received: from vms173013pub.verizon.net (vms173013pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D91A68FC19 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:22:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx.menantico.com ([unknown] [71.188.45.31]) by vms173013.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0KW2002G03OG6DE1@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 18:21:57 -0600 (CST) Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 19:29:23 -0500 From: Skip Ford To: Antoine Brodin Message-id: <20100111002923.GA1065@menantico.com> References: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline In-reply-to: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MK_NETGRAPH and MK_ATM/MK_BLUETOOTH 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: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:22:10 -0000 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