From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 25 06:46:37 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA96C106564A for ; Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:46:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@koitsu.dyndns.org) Received: from qmta01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.62.24]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 748368FC0C for ; Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:46:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta19.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.98]) by qmta01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id cukP1h00527AodY51umdeV; Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:46:37 +0000 Received: from koitsu.dyndns.org ([67.180.84.87]) by omta19.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id cumc1h00D1t3BNj3fumcem; Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:46:37 +0000 Received: by icarus.home.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D03ED102C31; Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:46:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 23:46:34 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: Nenhum_de_Nos Message-ID: <20110925064634.GA31810@icarus.home.lan> References: <4E7DB740.9070206@rdtc.ru> <20110924111221.GA11624@icarus.home.lan> <36bdbdceb6cc95300d91690d1cf3e0e6.squirrel@eternamente.info> <20110924121001.GA14219@icarus.home.lan> <73a60aa11fb5447170894bc1bfc814bc.squirrel@eternamente.info> <48538aca6cfa538b6e7db4c414ab42ef.squirrel@eternamente.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48538aca6cfa538b6e7db4c414ab42ef.squirrel@eternamente.info> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Realtek integrated nic problem X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 06:46:37 -0000 On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 03:32:36AM -0300, Nenhum_de_Nos wrote: > > On Sat, September 24, 2011 22:12, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > Surely this is something to take up with the pfsense team? > > about the compiling issue yes, but yet the info about the if_re.ko is of > great value here :) > > as Jeremy said, the maintainer would be the best person to answer this :) I believe Adrian's point (and it's 100% valid) is that for pfSense issues you really need to bring them up with the pfSense folks. We all recognise pfSense is based on FreeBSD, but it's a fairly customised environment. Point is that mailing a FreeBSD list about issues centralised to pfSense isn't the best choice; for example, you wouldn't mail the lkml list about an issue with Red Hat. You have to bring these issues to the distributor's attention first. The other benefit is that by bringing it to the pfSense folks' attention, it may be possible to get a patch or updated driver brought in to the pfSense tree, which could fix the problem for future users. The FreeBSD mailing lists, generally speaking, have no idea what the state of things is with pfSense. For example *I* have no idea what FreeBSD version they use, what custom modifications they have in place, etc.. I follow FreeBSD, I don't follow pfSense. :-) -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, US | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP 4BD6C0CB |