(I'm afraid we're going to an off-topic. If this message needs a
response, we should perhaps do that off-list.)
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 15:40:14 -0700,
> "Li, Qing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> Are you perhaps asking for .emacs setting which conforms to this (the
>> four-space) style?
>
On Jun 3, 2005, at 6:40 PM, Li, Qing wrote:
Are you perhaps asking for .emacs setting which conforms to this (the
four-space) style?
Yes, do you have one ?
For most purposes, if you set c-basic-offset to 4, this will also
work fine with classic BSD-style code using 8-chars as the initia
>
> The only hard part I can see with the bsd style is the
> "four-space indentation" rule for the 2nd level:
>
Exactly.
>
>
> Are you perhaps asking for .emacs setting which conforms to this (the
> four-space) style?
>
Yes, do you have one ?
-- Qing
_
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 16:01:40 -0700,
> "Li, Qing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> Then please send me your final patch including proposed
>> commit message for final review again. After that, when no
>> more issues arise, you can go ahead and commit the change.
>>
>> Oh, BTW. Don't be a
If memory serves me right, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Oh, BTW. Don't be afraid when you get brucified. Bruce' style
> comments are a very valuable learning resource. Everyone of us got
> brucified more than once. ;-) (I'm talking about Bruce Evans, bde@)
>
> Please check if my variant does the right thing in all cases.
> If you can confirm, then you can go ahead and write up a
> descriptive commit message.
>
Okay, I will verify your version.
>
> Then please send me your final patch including proposed
> commit message for final revi
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 13:33:32 +0200,
> Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> I verified this behavior on both FreeBSD 5.4 Release and 6.0-CURRENT.
> Looks very strange indeed.
>> I think this behavior is probably not intended and should be treated
>> as a bug. I did a quick patc
"Li, Qing" wrote:
>
> >
> > Please post unified diffs, they are far easier to read for humans.
> >
>
> Sorry, here is the patch again.
>
> -- Qing
>
> Index: route.c
> ===
> RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/net/route.c,v
>
>
> EINVAL might be a more appropriate error code.
>
-
heavygear# route add 10.1.1.1 -inet6 fe80::1%fxp0
route: writing to routing socket: Invalid argument
add host 10.1.1.1: gateway fe80::1%fxp0: Invalid argument
-
You're right. Thanks,
-- Qing
_
>
> Please post unified diffs, they are far easier to read for humans.
>
Sorry, here is the patch again.
-- Qing
Index: route.c
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/net/route.c,v
retrieving revision 1.108
diff -u -r1.108
Hi,
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 13:33:32 +0200
> Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I think this behavior is probably not intended and should be treated
> as a bug. I did a quick patch in sys/net/route.c
> (it's just as easy in sbin/route.c).
andre> Unless this causes or suppose
"Li, Qing" wrote:
>
>
> When I issued the following command by accident today:
>
>route add default -inet6 fe80:20d:56ff:fe8d:d4b0%fxp0
>
> The netstat shows the following:
>
> Internet:
> DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif
> Expire
> default
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Li, Qing wrote:
> route add 10.1.1.1 -inet6 fe80::1%fxp0
Out of curiosity, how are packets actually routed when using this?
~Neo-Vortex
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freeb
When I issued the following command by accident today:
route add default -inet6 fe80:20d:56ff:fe8d:d4b0%fxp0
The netstat shows the following:
Internet:
DestinationGatewayFlagsRefs Use Netif
Expire
defaultfe80:20d:56ff:fe8d:d4b0%fxp0
14 matches
Mail list logo
