DragonFly commits List (threaded) for 2005-09
[
Date Prev][
Date Next]
[
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index]
Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/tcp_wrappers diag.c
On 9/16/05, Matthew Dillon <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> :
> :Modifying contrib/ code directly is not our policy, please use the
> :patching framework to achieve an alternative. Thanks!
> :
> : -Hiten
>
> Well, except original (un-versioned) contrib code was never converted
> to the new policy. If the contrib directory is not versioned it probably
> doesn't have a README.DRAGONFLY in it either, is likely really ancient,
> and for expediency could be modified directly.
>
> Reading the later postings... before we go putting tcp-wrappers in base
> we should see how difficult it is to bring the latest vendor release
I forgot to mention the latest vendor release is "7.6-ipv6.4"
The "7.6" release without ipv6 support is ~8 years old.
Our contrib/tcp_wrapper began from vendor's "7.6" release and had
Kame's ipv6 changes, which should be quite stable.
FreeBSD contrib/tcp_wrapper/hosts_access.c rev1.3 commit log stated:
"...The base of patches are from KAME package and are actually daily
used for more than a year in several Japanese IPv6 environments. ..."
The question is, should we abandon Kame's ipv6 code and adopt vendor's
latest release("7.6-ipv6.4")
Since Kame's code is widely tested and is stable, IMHO, we should not
update to the latest vendor's release
Best Regards,
sephe
> into our contrib framework.
>
> -Matt
> Matthew Dillon
> <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
--
Live Free or Die
[
Date Prev][
Date Next]
[
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index]