[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: The IPsec kernel problem



also sprach Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [2003.10.03.0121 +0200]:
> I have given you the reason for this many times already.  Please
> reread the thread on debian-devel carefully.

This one post did in fact slip my eyes. In it, you mention some
checks when it comes to patch inclusion.

I have a particular problem with:

  * If it's a feature, can it be disabled/enabled at runtime?

    Sinec we're making generic kernels, this is a must.  The presence
    of the patch should not prevent me from doing something that I would
    otherwise be able to do.

I cannot disable IPsec at runtime as I cannot replace the IP stack
at runtime, and it modifies the IP stack. Moreover, you state the
reason why you should not put IPsec in the kernel right there: "The
presence of the patch should not prevent me from doing something
that I would otherwise be able to do." Well, it does.

-- 
Please do not CC me when replying to lists; I read them!
 
 .''`.     martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :'  :    proud Debian developer, admin, and user
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
 
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!

Attachment: pgpJWt5dg0HDw.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: