From owner-freebsd-bugs Wed May 29 12:38:57 1996 Return-Path: owner-bugs Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA29087 for bugs-outgoing; Wed, 29 May 1996 12:38:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ki.net (root@ki.net [205.150.102.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA29080 for ; Wed, 29 May 1996 12:38:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (scrappy@localhost) by ki.net (8.7.5/8.7.5) with SMTP id PAA11854; Wed, 29 May 1996 15:38:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 15:38:47 -0400 (EDT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: Sujal Patel cc: freebsd-bugs@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386/631 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 29 May 1996, Sujal Patel wrote: > On Tue, 28 May 1996, Lars Fredriksen wrote: > > > > > Nobody appears to know how to put this card into promiscuous mode, nor > > > > how to configure its multicast filters. I tried to argued that bpf is > > > > useful without promiscuous mode, but was overruled. > > > > > > > Can we close it then? Its been there for almost a year now... > > > if someone *really* misses it, they can always submit a new PR...? > > I could have sworn there was a "Bug State" called "Held" for PR's that > couldn't be solved immediately for one reason or another, and for when the > fix wasn't feasible at the current time. Was I hallucinating or > something? > The state is 'suspended', and I've just changed it to that, since everyone seems to indicate that if_ix.c needs a major rewrite... Marc G. Fournier scrappy@ki.net Systems Administrator @ ki.net scrappy@freebsd.org