Overall, vimage sounds very useful. Are there changes to public kernel interfaces? (ie could it potentially be MFCd) On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 09:31:40PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: >>> The current version referred to in the code is implemented in >>> a manner that allows it to be COMPILED OUT. Since even things like INET and INET6 are "compiled in" rather than "compiled out" on request, why is vimage defaulting to "compiled in" by default? >No. There are some minor reorganisations of where some variables are, and >some minor changes but they are pretty easy to confirm as being >"functionally equivalent". Macros are used to do a lot but there are some >places where it was not possible to hide it behind a macro, so small >re-orgs were required.. they really are small in comparison to >the whole work though, and as I said. quite "provable". How much will impact on the ease with which networking stack changes can be MFCd back to 7.x? >I say the next few weeks because we need it to happen NOW and >not "just before 8.0" Agreed but I can understand Brook's reluctance to have yet another roto-tilling of the network stack whilst there still appear to be a few issues remaining from the last roto-tilling. IMHO, it would be reasonable to get input from re_at_ as to whether they would like the stack left alone for a while to simplify the resolution of any issues that may crop up once 7.0 is released. -- Peter Jeremy Please excuse any delays as the result of my ISP's inability to implement an MTA that is either RFC2821-compliant or matches their claimed behaviour.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:28 UTC