Is anyone aware that VIMAGE on powerpc is currently broken ?
In file included from /export/usr/src/sys/netinet/in_proto.c:83:
/export/usr/src/sys/netinet/udp_var.h: In function 'get_inpcbinfo':
/export/usr/src/sys/netinet/udp_var.h:153: error: dereferencing pointer to
incomplete type
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Eygene Ryabinkin r...@freebsd.org wrote:
I assume that your pf(4) is enabled during these tests, you have
scrub statements in the ruleset and removing scrub will restore
the expected behaviour on 10.x?
I can confirm that I see exactly what you are saying on a
The following reply was made to PR kern/190102; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: hiren panchasara hiren.panchas...@gmail.com
To: Eygene Ryabinkin r...@freebsd.org
Cc: FreeBSD GNATS followup bug-follo...@freebsd.org,
freebsd-net@freebsd.org freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re:
hi
the rule of ipfw is kind of semantic, and it is powerful. so it means good
for normal users. but not for developers of it, because simplicity actually
is hidden complexity.that is the reason developers fulfilled so many rule
options to match the traffic. and the man page of ipfw becomes long
Looks very similar to ng_bpf + ipfw ngtee, isn't it?
29.05.2014 11:25, Bill Yuan пишет:
It is a really powerful thing in my opinion. but it has requirement,
to master it requires the knowledge of the structure of the
packet/frame/whatever. Anyone like this feature? Like it ? please
voice out.
Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:52:51PM -0700, hiren panchasara wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Eygene Ryabinkin r...@freebsd.org wrote:
I assume that your pf(4) is enabled during these tests, you have
scrub statements in the ruleset and removing scrub will restore
the expected behaviour
The following reply was made to PR kern/190102; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Eygene Ryabinkin r...@freebsd.org
To: hiren panchasara hiren.panchas...@gmail.com
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org freebsd-net@freebsd.org,
FreeBSD GNATS followup bug-follo...@freebsd.org
Subject: Re:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Bill Yuan byc...@gmail.com wrote:
hi
the rule of ipfw is kind of semantic, and it is powerful. so it means good
for normal users. but not for developers of it, because simplicity actually
...
So i am proposing a new rule option `u32` and the usage will
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 02:34:47AM -0400, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
Is anyone aware that VIMAGE on powerpc is currently broken ?
Hi Jason,
Did you mean that compile VIMAGE support into your kernel will fail?
If so, what compiler do you use? Thanks.
In file included from
The following reply was made to PR kern/190102; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Mark Felder f...@freebsd.org
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: kern/190102: [tcp] net.inet.tcp.drop_synfin=1 no longer works on
FreeBSD 10 [regression]
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 07:25:31 -0500
The
Hi,
I'm working on the OSv project (http://osv.io/), a new BSD-licensed
operating system for virtual machines. OSv's networking code is based
on that of FreeBSD.
I recently noticed an inefficiency that I believe exists also in
FreeBSD's networking code, and I was wondering why this was done,
and
Sure your generic binary match could be a welcome
addition to ipfw. But its usefulness is extremely
limited in practice, as it only lets you match stuff
in fixed position of a packet, and it is not even good
to do other relatively simple things such as skip
options and the like.
Sure.
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 08:45:26PM +0800, bycn82 wrote:
...
Sure, that is the reason why developers are providing more and more rule
options. But the my question is do we have enough options to match all the
fixed position values?
we do not have an option for fixed position matching.
As i
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 08:45:26PM +0800, bycn82 wrote:
...
Sure, that is the reason why developers are providing more and more rule
options. But the my question is do we have enough options to match all the
fixed
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Andreas Nilsson andrn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 08:45:26PM +0800, bycn82 wrote:
...
Sure, that is the reason why developers are providing more and more
rule options.
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Andreas Nilsson andrn...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 08:45:26PM +0800, bycn82 wrote:
...
Sure,
-Original Message-
From: 'Luigi Rizzo' [mailto:ri...@iet.unipi.it]
Sent: 29 May, 2014 21:10
To: bycn82
Cc: 'FreeBSD Net'
Subject: Re: propose a new generic purpose rule option for ipfw
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 08:45:26PM +0800, bycn82 wrote:
...
Sure, that is the reason why
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 09:48:58PM +0800, bycn82 wrote:
-Original Message-
From: 'Luigi Rizzo' [mailto:ri...@iet.unipi.it]
Sent: 29 May, 2014 21:10
To: bycn82
Cc: 'FreeBSD Net'
Subject: Re: propose a new generic purpose rule option for ipfw
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at
Hi Kevin,
Default on PowerPC is GCC 4.2.1
Its hard to see that this wouldn't turn up elsewhere on other arch' stop though
as from what I seen doesn't seem to be dependent on PowerPC alone.
But to confirm my previous build, after backing out udplite the build did
complete just fine. I'll find
Then it will be very good to see your pf.conf and pfctl -s all,
because just now I can't reproduce that on 10.x without scrub.
--
Eygene Ryabinkin,,,^..^,,,
[ Life's unfair - but root password helps! | codelabs.ru ]
[ 82FE 06BC D497 C0DE 49EC
Hi,
Does any plan commit and MFC to the 10-stable ?
Regards
Simon
于 14-5-29 0:42, Julien Charbon 写道:
Hi,
On 23/05/14 22:52, Julien Charbon wrote:
On 23/05/14 14:06, Julien Charbon wrote:
On 27/02/14 11:32, Julien Charbon wrote:
On 07/11/13 14:55, Julien Charbon wrote:
On Mon, 04
21 matches
Mail list logo
