From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 23 08:07:24 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 982B816A4CE; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 08:07:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hetzner.co.za (lfw.hetzner.co.za [196.7.18.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A24143D1D; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 08:07:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ianf@hetzner.co.za) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by hetzner.co.za with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1Bd2mD-000I0a-00; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 10:06:37 +0200 To: Julian Elischer From: Ian FREISLICH In-Reply-To: Message from Julian Elischer Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 10:06:37 +0200 Sender: ianf@hetzner.co.za Message-Id: cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New preview patch for ipfw to pfil_hooks conversion X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 08:07:24 -0000 Julian Elischer wrote: > On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > > Andre Oppermann wrote: > > > Here is the next preview patch for the ipfw to pfil_hooks conversion: > > > > > > http://www.nrg4u.com/freebsd/ipfw-pfilhooks-and-more-20040621.diff > > > > > > This patch significantly cleans up ip_input.c and ip_output.c. > > > > Now that you're actively working on that part of the source, would > > it be possible to take a look? I would also be happy to create a > > new patch to fix this problem against ipfw with pfilhooks if that's > > what it's going to take to get a fix committed. > > > > hmmm I guess the pathc should be pointed out to luigi or an ipfw > person.. > it's probably not that you're being ignored it's probably that no-one > who has his fingers in ipfw noticed it.. I've mailed Luigi. I've mailed the patch to current (once) and ipfw (twice). I submitted the PR on Max Laier's request 'so it wouldn't get lost'. I then drew ipfw's attention to the PR at least twice with a couple of weeks break in between. It's been mailed to ipfw weekly since 2004/03/14 in the 'Current problem reports assigned to you' from the FreeBSD bugmaster. I even mentioned this to my friend Mark Murray who said that he'll mention it to Luigi over beer. Still nothing until now (I don't know if the beer happened though) and I suspect that it might make Andre's life a little harder because I don't know how neatly it will fit in with what he's doing. I guess I don't really mind if the patch isn't used, but some feedback would be nice: 'It can't be used because your coding style sucks' or 'the packet should be reinjected into the firewall in such and such a way'. I know this is a volunteer project. It's a great project that I want to contribute back to. I know that keeping private patches will prevent me from tracking CURRENT or STABLE at some stage. I know this is a bit emotional: it's just been a bit of a frustrating experience because the committers keep on say 'we don't always have the time to fix every little nit, but help us out and send some patches'. Well, here are some patches. I know that patches and other contributions have just been ignored in the past (just look at the PR database as an example - its full of untapped patches and fixes) and its a real turn-off. My thanks go to Andre for picking up the ball. I'm not sure responses to this should be cross-posted to freebsd-net. Ian -- Ian Freislich