From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 5 18:38:24 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 329E1238; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 18:38:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Cy.Schubert@komquats.com) Received: from smtp-out-05.shaw.ca (smtp-out-05.shaw.ca [64.59.134.13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECA7F1BF4; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 18:38:23 +0000 (UTC) X-Cloudmark-SP-Filtered: true X-Cloudmark-SP-Result: v=1.1 cv=7/EMZfWbaVtDMdTqnk9efwidrOfQb3DZMdpNhNw5Oc4= c=1 sm=1 a=uK1SP89eXToA:10 a=QrugwKR0C_UA:10 a=wAGQQ9Az6v0A:10 a=BLceEmwcHowA:10 a=ICAaq7hcmGcA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=IbtKDeXwb2+SRU442/pi3A==:17 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=BWvPGDcYAAAA:8 a=G7z1ruPbs4n8mjnNMOwA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=SV7veod9ZcQA:10 a=V7tsTZBp22UA:10 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117 Received: from unknown (HELO spqr.komquats.com) ([96.50.7.119]) by smtp-out-05.shaw.ca with ESMTP; 05 Jul 2013 12:38:23 -0600 Received: from slippy.cwsent.com (slippy8 [10.2.2.6]) by spqr.komquats.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD38080; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 11:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slippy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slippy.cwsent.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id r65IcL2Q005119; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 11:38:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Cy.Schubert@komquats.com) Message-Id: <201307051838.r65IcL2Q005119@slippy.cwsent.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.8.0 04/21/2012 with nmh-1.5 From: Cy Schubert X-os: FreeBSD X-Sender: cy@cwsent.com X-URL: http://www.komquats.com/ To: Gleb Smirnoff Subject: Re: Ipfilter pre-Vendor Import Issue In-Reply-To: Message from Gleb Smirnoff of "Fri, 05 Jul 2013 12:46:49 +0400." <20130705084649.GC67810@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 11:38:21 -0700 Cc: current@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: Cy Schubert List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 18:38:24 -0000 In message <20130705084649.GC67810@FreeBSD.org>, Gleb Smirnoff writes: > Cy, > > On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 03:10:14PM -0700, Cy Schubert wrote: > C> Unfortunately it doesn't work any more. Here is what svn spit out at me. > C> > C> slippy$ cd $MY_WORK_DIR/current/contrib/ipfilter > C> slippy$ svn merge --record-only file:///tank/wrepos/wsvn/base/vendor/ipfil > te > C> r/dist@252548 > C> svn: E205000: Try 'svn help merge' for more information > C> svn: E205000: Source and target must be different but related branches > C> svn: E205000: Source and target have no common ancestor: > C> 'file:///tank/wrepos/wsvn/base/vendor/ipfilter/dist@252548' and > C> '.@unspecified' > C> slippy$ > > AFAIU, the problem is that current contrib/ipfilter was never merged > from vendor/ipfilter. So, actually we are dealing with a first import > (from subversion viewpoint), not n-th. That's unfortunate. > > What I'd prefer to see is the following: > > - commit new ipfilter untouched to vendor-sys/ipfilter > - nuke sys/contrib/ipfilter > - svn copy vendor-sys/ipfilter to sys/netpfil/ipfilter Having ipfilter in one place instead of two (vendor and vendor-sys) makes a lot more sense. I suppose we could put ipfilter's kernel components in sys/netpfil but what about the userland sources? Also see my reply below regarding keeping it in contrib. > > In future imports do: > > - commit newer ipfilter to vendor-sys/ipfilter > - svn merge vendor-sys/ipfilter to sys/netpfil/ipfilter > > What's the reason to keep code in contrib? The reason to keep ipftilter in contrib is to maintain consistency with other contributed software such as bind, nvi, sendmail, pf, and a host of other notable software we don't maintain ourselves. Maintaining consistency with other contributed software should probably be maintained. I'm open to moving all packet filters, e.g. ipfw, pf, and ipfilter into sys/netpfil as long as consistency is maintained across the board. Do you think we should put the userland sources also in the same location or should we maintain a similar separation we do today? I'm open to both however I'd prefer keeping all vendor software (kernel and userland) in one location. -- Cheers, Cy Schubert FreeBSD UNIX: Web: http://www.FreeBSD.org The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.