See pedantic chiding below at the bottom of this post. On Mon, 5 Jan 2009, Steven Zhou wrote: > It seems that this book is based on 2.4 version. > Below is the table of content of Chapter 1: > > 1 INTRODUCTION. > > 1.1 Overview of TCP/IP Stack. > > 1.2 Source Code Organization for Linux 2.4.20. ... snip ... > > Who can make sure that on which version of this book was based ? > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 8:22 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 4 Jan 2009, Pedro Roure Malta de Sa wrote: > > > Anybody knows if this book, about TCP/IP stack implementation in Linux, > covers 2.6 > > or 2.4 kernel series ? > > > > 2009/1/4 Denis Kirjanov <kirjanov@xxxxxxxxx> > > I have a copy. It's well, but too big) > > > > Recently was published book about TCP/IP stack implementation in > Linux: > > > >http://www.amazon.com/Architecture-Design-Implementation-Linux-Practitioners/dp/ > 047 > > 0147733/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231089656&sr=8-3 > > I think that the book should be good. > > not to get all pedantic and everything, but this thread is the perfect example of why people who participate in mailing lists: 1) should not top post, and 2) should trim extraneous material the subject of this thread is the book "Professional Linux Kernel Architecture," during which someone asked about the *TCP/IP* book, whereupon a responder pointed out that it (the TCP/IP book) was based on the 2.4 kernel but, by top-posting that, it might leave the unwary reader with the impression that it was the *original* book that had that flaw. let's be a little more careful with our posts out there, shall we? rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry: Have classroom, will lecture. http://crashcourse.ca Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA ========================================================================
