On 20 November 2014 at 15:37, Martin Pieuchot <mpieuc...@nolizard.org> wrote: > When I decided to use in6_ifaddloop() for IPv4 I barely though about > the name of the function. Recently mikeb@ told me that the name is > confusing, especially because I'm trying to turn the "loopback hack" > into "local routes". > > So here's a diff to rename these functions and to make them return > the error code of rtrequest9(9), ignored for the moment. > > Ok? >
looks good to me.
