On Monday 2008-04-14 08:56, Patrick McHardy wrote: > Jan Engelhardt wrote: >> On Monday 2008-04-14 08:46, Patrick McHardy wrote: >> > Was there some resolution on the discussion that this >> > is the way to go? I mainly would like to see an ACK >> > from Jozsef for this change before applying it. >> > >> There was some sort of positive agreement: >> >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/netfilter-devel/msg02729.html (ipset) >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/netfilter-devel/msg02727.html (condition) > > Yes, "sort of". So far it seems most convenient to keep ipset in > iptables. What was the exact problem with these extensions again? > The problem is not the extensions themselves; but they do not compile due to a lack of their header files. Should it just be added? Should ipset instead be added to the kernel? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
