Am 14.02.2012 um 12:37 schrieb Alexander Leidinger:
> 1 FLOWTABLE
The last time I included this in a kernel it seemed to have odd effects on TCP
connections. Admittedly, that was probably two years or so ago, and I never
bothered to find out what was happening in detail. Is it safe now?
Ste
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Alexander Leidinger
wrote:
> Quoting Freddie Cash (from Tue, 14 Feb 2012 08:26:54
> -0800):
>
>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Ian Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 2:37:55 +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>>> > 1 IPSTEALTH -> cha
Quoting Freddie Cash (from Tue, 14 Feb 2012
08:26:54 -0800):
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Ian Smith wrote:
On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 2:37:55 +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> 1 IPSTEALTH -> changes ipfw module only?
I don't think this is specific to ipfw. From /sys/con
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Ian Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 2:37:55 +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> > 1 IPSTEALTH -> changes ipfw module only?
>
> I don't think this is specific to ipfw. From /sys/conf/NOTES:
>
> # IPSTEALTH enables code to support stealth fo
On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 2:37:55 +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> Here is what I got, the first column is the number of requests, the second
> what is requested, and the 3rd my comments (basically it means, if there is a
> comment, it is not needed/possible to include in a modular kernel):
> ---s
Quoting Attilio Rao (from Tue, 14 Feb 2012
12:38:17 +):
2012/2/14, Alexander Leidinger :
2 SW_WATCHDOG
This can become a module with very little effort I guess.
What's the TODO list for this?
Bye,
Alexander.
--
No man is lonely while eating spaghetti.
http://www.Leidinger.net
2012/2/14, Alexander Leidinger :
> Quoting Alexander Leidinger (from Fri, 10
> Feb 2012 14:56:04 +0100):
>
>> Such a kernel would cover situations where people compile their own
>> kernel because they want to get rid of some unused kernel code (and
>> maybe even need the memory this frees up).
>>
Quoting Alexander Leidinger (from Fri, 10
Feb 2012 14:56:04 +0100):
Such a kernel would cover situations where people compile their own
kernel because they want to get rid of some unused kernel code (and
maybe even need the memory this frees up).
The question is, is this enough? Or asked
