From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 21 15:20:20 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7558631D; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:20:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ermal.luci@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qa0-f54.google.com (mail-qa0-f54.google.com [209.85.216.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3CC98FC14; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:20:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id g24so1949001qab.13 for ; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 07:20:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=KfIA0KaOZjheJVvdnfwLBWJcydmA8jDGovZHkuaAh8s=; b=vp4x510RZnJOpe69SidWuWCSOCM0vwlUXK7zcZ91nA6VG1KKlx8P2vLcYvTZudIuRH Ls9g3FwSX5t35t65rFie2NVr3CA/kVOtTpresl7FLxo2D5VJTvffJMd8Hi1o6+jr1Nl2 efXX2qdtVqm/T/wVflDlitUR0ykTNRldAPAJF8sqizlg15F+ZVEbqCcH2KzzjrOhWDL3 ZCf4H/bo1ZPGVUNYF+MPWNR67dJaZWqGcbQa9+FkKQHOxVYj2dk08By3mp8ycZjQFH+r E4GG/1Xv7iAo2AD9U/CaBnGDfTaQAWWyRBp3Fl4YL2OUfnTNS4NxpqM7o9O7NzeCFA+u djIw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.49.82.98 with SMTP id h2mr21375979qey.14.1353511219194; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 07:20:19 -0800 (PST) Sender: ermal.luci@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.121.163 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 07:20:19 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20121121145240.GE67660@glebius.int.ru> References: <201211201543.17903.Mark.Martinec+freebsd@ijs.si> <20121121075642.GR67660@FreeBSD.org> <20121121145240.GE67660@glebius.int.ru> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 16:20:19 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ncNQudYbymus4Hb1yAGgVIG745U Message-ID: Subject: Re: Upgrading FreeBSD to use the NEW pf syntax. From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ermal_Lu=E7i?= To: Gleb Smirnoff Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: Mark Martinec , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, "freebsd-pf@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:20:20 -0000 On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:44:13PM +0100, Ermal Lu?i wrote: > E> Cherry-picking would be when tehre is reasonable similarities. > E> Also another argument to do this would be simplicity on locking as well > as > E> i told you when you started the changes. > > You were wrong. OpenBSD doesn't move towards SMP model. Locking more > recent pf is not simplier, but the opposite. > > I am sorry but you are asking arguments i already have given you. You didn;t listen once and i do not expect this time as well. > E> Though i am open to work together on this to merge the new syntax > thorugh a > E> whole bulk merge rather than cherry-pick. > > How many bugs have you closed after the previous bulk import? Why should > we expect anything good from new import if the previous one was a PITA? > > Well you have used it for your work so it was not so PITA. Most of the ones you closed had message 'This is to old to be true'; 'I have re-written PF and this should be fixed'. > And still I don't see any answer on the question: what exact features or > perfomance improvements are we going to obtain from "the new pf"? > > See above. > E> You already have 'broken' some functionality as if-bound in FreeBSD > 10.x so > > Is there any PR filed on that? I didn't even receive a mail about that. > > I really do not think you do the right approach or the right communication on this. Sorry for replying to you ;). > -- > Totus tuus, Glebius. > -- Ermal