Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:39:18 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Sergey Mokryshev <mokr@mokr.net> Cc: Vallo Kallaste <kalts@estpak.ee>, Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>, Hiten Pandya <hiten@unixdaemons.com>, Darren Reed <darrenr@reed.wattle.id.au>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PFIL_HOOKS should be made default in 5.0 Message-ID: <3E04A746.20C5C72E@mindspring.com> References: <20021221040724.G7129-100000@lemori.mokr.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sergey Mokryshev wrote: > > I'm really not a fan of "NO_PFIL_HOOKS" as an option. > > I'm not talking about NO_PFIL_HOOKS but "options PFIL_HOOKS" in GENERIC. > Too many people may foot shoot themselves trying to upgrade from 4-STABLE > to 5.0. If you make them non-optional, which is what started this thread, then you *are* talking about having to add an option in to get rid of them. I understand that people all want their pet software to run out of the box without modification. > > Probably the correct thing to do is to wire in ipfilter as a > > Netgraph module. > > AFAIK Solaris, HP-UX and others lack Netgraph support, but support pfil. They support Streams, instead. Same ecological niche. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E04A746.20C5C72E>