On Thursday 2010-09-23 03:01, Mr Dash Four wrote: > >> That starts to sounds like the project is run with an uncorrelated concurrent >> asynchronous interaction of the manus(es). Suggested anger management should >> involve the double-agent maintainer who was bribed to put iptables in /sbin in >> the first place. > > Should they be in /usr/sbin then? Yes. They are not essential to run fsck/mount/thelike in case of an emergency. >>> [bugzilla.gentoo.org/325257] >>> I just found that out to my cost - need to download the patch, update my >>> source and rebuild the kernel again, then rinse, repeat with xtables and hope >>> that it >>> >> >> I wonder. F13 ships with linux-glibc-devel-2.6.33, F14A with -2.6.35. So where >> is the actual issue? Nevertheless, I have devised a workaround for 2.6.34 >> headers. Check out xt-a's b5e2c7255a87f3d981968e21ea7f88401fe8f8ad and let me >> know. >> > On my system it shows glibc-devel-2.12-3 (I don't have linux-glibc-devel). It's called kernel-headers in Fedora. (Reason for it being called elsewhere is that some noobs spout out "you need kernel headers to build modules" and another noob installs kernel-headers rather than kernel-devel-XYZ.) -- 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
