From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 9 09:21:45 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 668A2870 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:21:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (glebius.int.ru [81.19.69.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E58DD12C8 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 09:21:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id r699Lbip093385; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 13:21:37 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from glebius@localhost) by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id r699La1I093384; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 13:21:36 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cell.glebius.int.ru: glebius set sender to glebius@FreeBSD.org using -f Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 13:21:36 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff To: Cy Schubert Subject: Re: Ipfilter pre-Vendor Import Issue Message-ID: <20130709092136.GL67810@glebius.int.ru> References: <20130708134400.GH67810@glebius.int.ru> <201307082000.r68K02Ef063517@slippy.cwsent.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201307082000.r68K02Ef063517@slippy.cwsent.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: current@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 09:21:45 -0000 On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 01:00:02PM -0700, Cy Schubert wrote: C> > The BSD license allows us to put the code into FreeBSD w/o any separation. C> > C> > So the question is: what is more handy to us? C> > C> > What do we actually gain having contrib/ipf, assuming we got vendor branch C> > already? C> > C> > What we lose is: C> > - more complex Makefiles C> > - more complex hacking: edit files in one place, run make in other C> C> How is this for a plan? C> C> Instead of importing the kernel bits into vendor-sys/ipfilter and the C> userland bits into vendor/ipfilter, the base tarball should be imported C> into vendor-sys/ipfilter (or vendor/ipfilter, doesn't matter which). We C> keep the complete tarball imported into one place in the tree. I'd prefer vendor/ipfilter as single place of vendor imports. C> Merge ipfilter into sys/netpfil/ipfilter (for kernel bits) and C> netpfil/ipfilter (for userland bits). C> C> We should probably think of moving pf and ipfw into the new subdirectory as C> well, but that's for a future discussion. No, userland tools should be placed in bin|sbin|usr.bin|usr.sbin, according to the place where they are installed. An exlusion can be made adding a intermediate subdir (like this is already done for ipfilter tools), to group all related tools together. -- Totus tuus, Glebius.