Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 12:05:25 +0900 From: MIHIRA "Sanpei" Yoshiro <sanpei@yy.cs.keio.ac.jp> To: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: __FreeBSD_version Message-ID: <199702240305.MAA03834@lavender.yy.cs.keio.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 20 Feb 1997 23:51:22 -0800 (PST)" References: <199702210751.XAA02773@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>However, I'm not sure what to do with the following three ports. In >each case, it is drawing a line between 199607 (2.1.5R) and 199608 >(2.2-current right after 2.1.5 is released), so the question is >whether it just meant "on the 2.1 branch" (at that time, of course it >was correct) or was it really fixed in 2.1.6R? > >(2) net/wide-dhcp (maintainer sanpei) > >=== >+#if __FreeBSD_version < 199608 >+ snd.ether->ether_type = ETHERTYPE_IP; >+#else > snd.ether->ether_type = htons(ETHERTYPE_IP); >+#endif >=== Hi. I'm wide-dhcp maintainer. This patch is for changes of if_ethersubr.c and if_ether.c at 1996/07/13. I think 199608 mean that changes on 2.2 branch(Yes, to tell the truth, 199608 mean "2.2-current before 2.1" :-<). Not changed in 2.1.6R. From: ports/net/wide-dhcp/patches/patch-ac CVS 1.3 log >Make this work on -current post this change: > > * davidg 96/06/12 19:54:21 > * > * Modified: sys/net if_ethersubr.c > * sys/netinet if_ether.c > * Log: > * Keep ether_type in network order for BPF to be consistent with other > * systems. >From : sys/net/if_ethersubr.c CVS 1.20 log >1.20 Thu Jun 13 2:54:03 1996 by davidg >Diffs to 1.19 > >Keep ether_type in network order for BPF to be consistent with other >systems. > >Submitted by: Ted Lemon, Matt Thomas, and others. Retrofitted for > -current by me. I have any good idea about this. Thank you. --- Yoshiro MIHIRA Keio Univ. Japan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702240305.MAA03834>