netgraph only on i386/ia64 - why ?
julian at elischer.org
Thu Aug 19 18:15:13 PDT 2004
John Polstra wrote:
>I dropped scottl and re from the cc list, since they're busy and asked
>us to work it out on our own.
>On 20-Aug-2004 Julian Elischer wrote:
>>Ok so what is the next number that should be used?
>>it's currently #define __FreeBSD_version 600000
>Yes, that would be the next number. I question whether
>__FreeBSD_version needs to be bumped at all, though, since the
>change is already reflected in NG_VERSION and NG_ABI_VERSION. Any
>port that uses netgraph would be compiled against the header files
>on the system, so I can't see how it would be useful to change
>__FreeBSD_version for this. (Not that I feel very strongly about it.)
I sort of agree..
We protect ourselves.. we needn't bump the FreeBSD version I don't think..
If you have a good reason for it I'll do it but I don't think it is
required.. No port will be compiled
with different options because of this..
I mean 5.3 and 6.0 will already have a netgraph recompile required..
>>here's a cut-n-paste version.. for comment..
>>it's ready to commit.
>Thanks for taking this on. I haven't tested it, but it looks good.
>Just one nit: "align" is misspelled as "allign" in the UPDATING entry.
>freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
>To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-net