On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 06:24:20PM +0100, Max Laier wrote:
> On Saturday 04 February 2006 16:16, Max Laier wrote:
> > On Thursday 02 February 2006 14:37, Max Laier wrote:
> > > On Thursday 02 February 2006 13:43, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > > > > This needs to be fixed in pf then.
> > > >
> > > > Max Lai
On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 04:16:49PM +0100, Max Laier wrote:
> On Thursday 02 February 2006 14:37, Max Laier wrote:
> > On Thursday 02 February 2006 13:43, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > > > This needs to be fixed in pf then.
> > >
> > > Max Laier and I discussed this issue once, and Max had concern
> > > ove
On Saturday 04 February 2006 16:16, Max Laier wrote:
> On Thursday 02 February 2006 14:37, Max Laier wrote:
> > On Thursday 02 February 2006 13:43, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > > > This needs to be fixed in pf then.
> > >
> > > Max Laier and I discussed this issue once, and Max had concern
> > > over poss
At Sat, 4 Feb 2006 16:16:49 +0100,
Max Laier wrote:
> Here it is. I'd appreciate feedback. pflog_packet() uses a lot of complex
> types which makes it necessary to include pfvar.h. This is ugly, but I don't
> know how to work around this.
I gave this a quick read and it looked OK to me.
Late
On Thursday 02 February 2006 14:37, Max Laier wrote:
> On Thursday 02 February 2006 13:43, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > > This needs to be fixed in pf then.
> >
> > Max Laier and I discussed this issue once, and Max had concern
> > over possible performance degradation that might result from
> > calling p
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 05:47:43AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 02:37:28PM +0100, Max Laier wrote:
>
> > will try to commit a sollution to HEAD over the weekend. If you are
> > MFC'ing
> > the changes *now*, I'd appreciate if you could spare out pf, but I am
> > willing
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 02:37:28PM +0100, Max Laier wrote:
> On Thursday 02 February 2006 13:43, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > > This needs to be fixed in pf then.
> >
> > Max Laier and I discussed this issue once, and Max had concern
> > over possible performance degradation that might result from
> > cal
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 02:37:28PM +0100, Max Laier wrote:
> On Thursday 02 February 2006 13:43, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > > This needs to be fixed in pf then.
> >
> > Max Laier and I discussed this issue once, and Max had concern
> > over possible performance degradation that might result from
> > cal
On Thursday 02 February 2006 13:43, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > This needs to be fixed in pf then.
>
> Max Laier and I discussed this issue once, and Max had concern
> over possible performance degradation that might result from
> calling pflog functions through pointers to be set by a separate
> pflog m
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 09:01:49AM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 01:49:40AM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:37:46PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 06:41:10PM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 01:49:40AM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:37:46PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 06:41:10PM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:04:21 +0300
> > > > Gleb Smirnoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > >
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 09:59:39PM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 01:49:40AM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:37:46PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 06:41:10PM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:04
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 01:49:40AM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:37:46PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 06:41:10PM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:04:21 +0300
> > > > Gleb Smirnoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > >
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:37:46PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 06:41:10PM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> > > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:04:21 +0300
> > > Gleb Smirnoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >
> > glebius> If you have compiled the modules as part of buildkernel
>
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 06:41:10PM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:04:21 +0300
> > Gleb Smirnoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> glebius> If you have compiled the modules as part of buildkernel
> glebius> target, then all options from kernel would apply to all
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 01:36:19AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
L> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:04:21PM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
L> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:56:58AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
L> > L> just noticed that if_bridge.ko fails to load if your kernel
L> > L> is not compiled with INET6 - t
Hi,
> On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:04:21 +0300
> Gleb Smirnoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
glebius> If you have compiled the modules as part of buildkernel
glebius> target, then all options from kernel would apply to all
glebius> modules, thus the bridge_ip6_checkbasic() function won't
glebius> be
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:04:21PM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:56:58AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> L> just noticed that if_bridge.ko fails to load if your kernel
> L> is not compiled with INET6 - the failure is actually only
> L> on symbols related to stats gathering in
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:56:58AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
L> just noticed that if_bridge.ko fails to load if your kernel
L> is not compiled with INET6 - the failure is actually only
L> on symbols related to stats gathering in
L> bridge_ip6_checkbasic()
L>
L> I wonder if it might be worthwhile j
just noticed that if_bridge.ko fails to load if your kernel
is not compiled with INET6 - the failure is actually only
on symbols related to stats gathering in
bridge_ip6_checkbasic()
I wonder if it might be worthwhile just ignoring
those stats when compiling if_bridge as a module,
so it can be loa
20 matches
Mail list logo
