David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:29:24 -0700 > >> >> I note that the networking tree is adding new sysctls: >> >> <<<<<<< HEAD/include/linux/sysctl.h >> NET_IPV6_ACCEPT_SOURCE_ROUTE=25, >> ======= >> NET_IPV6_OPTIMISTIC_DAD=24, >> NET_IPV6_ACCEPT_SOURCE_ROUTE=25, >> >>>>>>> /include/linux/sysctl.h >> >> (Well, it's trying to - there are some git rejects in net-2.6.22) > > I knew this was going to happen because of Yoshifuji's > security fix, the conflict is trivial to resolve. > > I'll rebase the net-2.6.22 tree later today since all > we should have before 2.6.21-final is the netlink > OOPS'er fix Alexey just posted.
David for clarity do you happen to know of anyone using binary sysctl values? In particular is there any reason not to use CTL_UNNUMBERED for new networking sysctls? Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
