Re: 2.5/2.6 IPsec stack should live in a kernel-patch!
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 08:31:47PM -0400, Jim Penny wrote: > On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 01:38:45 +0200 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Domenico Andreoli) wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 05:38:51PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > [ObPrivate: this doesn't belong on private. Quote me freely.] > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 11:56:14PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > > > > > > > Thus I propose that Herbert should remove the IPsec patch and make > > > > it a separate kernel-patch. If anyone has other objections than "I > > > > won't do it because it's my choice, I don't feel like it, and > > > > there is nothing you can do about it", then please speak up. On > > > > the other hand, if you agree with me, let your voice be heard! > > > > > i'm interested only in the debian kernel without 2.5/2.6 IPsec. in my > > mind this should be vanilla kernel + debian fixes. > > > > But 2.5/2.6 include IPSEC in the vanilla kernel! But 2.4 doesn't. And it's not a bug fix. It's a new feature. IMHO... It should not be in the 'vanilla' kernel. -- Paul
Re: 2.5/2.6 IPsec stack should live in a kernel-patch!
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 01:38:45 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Domenico Andreoli) wrote: > On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 05:38:51PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > [ObPrivate: this doesn't belong on private. Quote me freely.] > > > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 11:56:14PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > > > > > Thus I propose that Herbert should remove the IPsec patch and make > > > it a separate kernel-patch. If anyone has other objections than "I > > > won't do it because it's my choice, I don't feel like it, and > > > there is nothing you can do about it", then please speak up. On > > > the other hand, if you agree with me, let your voice be heard! > > > i'm interested only in the debian kernel without 2.5/2.6 IPsec. in my > mind this should be vanilla kernel + debian fixes. > But 2.5/2.6 include IPSEC in the vanilla kernel! Jim Penny
Re: 2.5/2.6 IPsec stack should live in a kernel-patch!
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 05:38:51PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > [ObPrivate: this doesn't belong on private. Quote me freely.] > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 11:56:14PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > > > Thus I propose that Herbert should remove the IPsec patch and make > > it a separate kernel-patch. If anyone has other objections than "I > > won't do it because it's my choice, I don't feel like it, and there > > is nothing you can do about it", then please speak up. On the other > > hand, if you agree with me, let your voice be heard! > i'm interested only in the debian kernel without 2.5/2.6 IPsec. in my mind this should be vanilla kernel + debian fixes. ... > If you want this inter-developer dispute to be taken *seriously*, that > is most likely a matter for the technical committee (debian-ctte). > i vote for this bye -[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50
