Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 07:28:07 -0200 From: JoaoBR <joao@matik.com.br> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Problems with IPv6-less kernel and world Message-ID: <200702110728.09385.joao@matik.com.br> In-Reply-To: <45CE7201.5080505@FreeBSD.org> References: <5fbf03c20702021132y5f931f5esdeab22d0048fa5a6@mail.gmail.com> <200702102100.11768.joao@matik.com.br> <45CE7201.5080505@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday 10 February 2007 23:31, Bruce M. Simpson wrote: > Hello, > > I'm afraid I disagree with a few of the points you raise. > I think both views have points and none of them is wrong. I accept as it is= =20 but I would prefer having it disabled by default. But perhaps this is valid= =20 only for my small part of the world :) WITHOUT_IPV6 is probably not read by kerberos, it compiles anyway=20 with -DINET6, I do not remember now if some other part also I am not sure if it is correct that a port compiles with ipv6 enabled when = the=20 kernel does not support it. IMO ipv6 capability should be checked by the =20 configure script. =2D-=20 Jo=E3o A mensagem foi scaneada pelo sistema de e-mail e pode ser considerada segura. Service fornecido pelo Datacenter Matik https://datacenter.matik.com.br
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200702110728.09385.joao>