On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 04:26:00PM -0500, jamal wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 16:17, Neil Horman wrote:
>
> > No worries. What exactly is the point of contention on netdev? (I'm not
> > currently following that list). My patch seems to follow the common
> > practice
> > for CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT,
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 16:17, Neil Horman wrote:
> No worries. What exactly is the point of contention on netdev? (I'm not
> currently following that list). My patch seems to follow the common practice
> for CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT, in that all references to the action member of the
> appropriate stru
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 04:12:01PM -0500, jamal wrote:
>
> This is being discussed on netdev at the moment. Thomas Graf is working
> on a patch.
> Thanks for the effort though.
>
> cheers,
> jamal
>
No worries. What exactly is the point of contention on netdev? (I'm not
currently following that
This is being discussed on netdev at the moment. Thomas Graf is working
on a patch.
Thanks for the effort though.
cheers,
jamal
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 15:25, Neil Horman wrote:
> Patch to fix build break that occurs when CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT is not set.
>
> Signed-off-by: Neil Horman <[EMAIL PROTE
Patch to fix build break that occurs when CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT is not set.
Signed-off-by: Neil Horman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cls_fw.c |3 ++-
cls_route.c |3 ++-
cls_tcindex.c |3 ++-
cls_u32.c |2 ++
4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
--- linux-2.6-sctp/ne
5 matches
Mail list logo
