Re: Default value of net.ipv6.bindv6only should revert to 0
- To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Default value of net.ipv6.bindv6only should revert to 0
- From: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 12:57:10 -0700
- Message-id: <87k4sbt9bd.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
- In-reply-to: <20100413181449.GA19470@a.mx.sbih.org> (John H. Robinson, IV's message of "Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:14:49 -0700")
- References: <87r5msss71.fsf@molech.giraffy.jp> <20100412195303.GA18573@angband.pl> <87sk70748z.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> <201004130724.18975.post@hendrik-sattler.de> <87hbnf52hp.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> <20100413090739.p0jr7lt2as40gcsc@v1539.ncsrv.de> <87zl1743zd.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> <20100413181449.GA19470@a.mx.sbih.org>
"John H. Robinson, IV" <jaqque@debian.org> writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> My understanding is that part (although certainly not all) of the
>> reason behind the default change is consistency with the kfreebsd
>> architectures which are expected to be part of Debian. Debian has
>> needed to adapt to BSD behavior, non-standard or not, since the project
>> decided to include the kfreebsd architectures. That's part of porting.
> What is wrong with porting kfreebsd behaivour instead?
I don't know. What do the BSD porters think about it?
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87k4sbt9bd.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu">http://lists.debian.org/87k4sbt9bd.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu
Reply to: