small fix to netatalk

[Robert N. M. Watson]

On 3 Aug 2009, at 09:11, Frank Lahm wrote:

> I just subscribed here so I can't followup neatly which will break
> threading, sorry for that.
>
> If appropiate please also provide any patches upstream. Thanks!
> Though I'm not sure _what_ you're really patching here, as the patch
> doesn't match neither upstream head nor branch-2-0 ?

This is a patch against the kernel netatalk code in FreeBSD,  
specifically, against address configuration for phase I addresses.  
Forgive a lack of knowledge of the netatalk project itself, but I had  
assumed we basically owned the kernel bits and were supposed to make  
sure they kept working, and you guys owned the userspace bits. If you  
are maintaining kernel bits, then we should talk about that since I've  
modified the FreeBSD netatalk kernel code heavily in the last few  
years during the fine-grained locking work on it. :-)

We should probably talk regardless as one of the big things we appear  
to be missing for the kernel netatalk code is a decent regression  
suite -- I have some casual local tests, but over the years we've  
picked up several reports of regressions (8 appears to have regressed  
with respect to multiple network interfaces being available, for  
example), and I know very little about the wire protocol. If you guys  
have any unit tests for kernel netatalk services, that would be  
excellent, but if not, perhaps you can provide some guidance on what  
sorts of units tests would be appropriate.

Robert