On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 12:20:40PM +0400, Andrey Chernov wrote: A> > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 12:07:35PM +0400, Andrey Chernov wrote: A> > A> There is a problem in recent -current to build ipfw with WITHOUT_PF A> > A> option, introduced in r257215. altq.c file produce error due to included A> > A> <net/pfvar.h> have following includes A> > A> A> > A> #include <netpfil/pf/pf.h> A> > A> #include <netpfil/pf/pf_altq.h> A> > A> #include <netpfil/pf/pf_mtag.h> A> > A> A> > A> and netpfil/pf directory is empty in A> > A> /usr/src/include/Makefile with WITHOUT_PF option. A> > A> > The quick solution would be to make ipfw lose some functionality if A> > PF is cut away from system. A> > A> > The proper solution would be to make ALTQ configurable w/o pfctl. A> > A> A> How it was handled previously? F.e. ipfw in -stable 9 builds normally A> with WITHOUT_PF and have pfvar.h included too, but old pfvar.h have only A> <net/pf_mtag.h> which is available with WITHOUT_PF. In 11 we are splitting the includes, but this isn't actually the cause of problem. This is unrelated. The cause is that in stable/9 header installation ignores WITHOUT_PF and installs headers always. Userland programs (except core pf utilities) are also compiled with pf support. So, in 11 WITHOUT_PF is more clean, but as you found, some consequences arise. -- Totus tuus, Glebius.Received on Sat Nov 23 2013 - 07:30:05 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:44 UTC