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. RobertReceived on Mon Aug 03 2009 - 06:44:03 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:53 UTC