On Thursday 2010-04-22 13:14, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>This looks better, thanks. A few remaining questions about things
>I missed previously:
Will deal with it shortly.
>> +static struct xt_match condition_mt_reg __read_mostly = {
>> + .name = "condition",
>> + .revision = 1,
>
>Why are we starting with revision 1?
So as to avoid collisions with previously-deployed extensions.
Debian once decided to patch their etch 2.6.18 kernel with
ipt_connlimit ("connlimit.0"). That subsequently backfired with the
etchnhalf upgrade where xt_connlimit (also known as "connlimit.0")
was introduced.
condition.0 was used by pom-ng.
For the same reason, xt_TEE-2.6.35 starts with TEE.1, because TEE.0
is already in use by the variant without oif in struct xt_tee_tginfo;
i.e. all the Xtables-addons installations to date, basically.
It is not a particularl hardship to pick a revision number that is
distinct from all revision numbers previously seen in the wild, so
I'm set to go this way.
--
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
