netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: iptables breakage WAS(Re: dummy as IMQ replacement

To: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: iptables breakage WAS(Re: dummy as IMQ replacement
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 02:31:58 +0100
Cc: Andy Furniss <andy.furniss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Remus <rmocius@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Nguyen Dinh Nam <nguyendinhnam@xxxxxxxxx>, Andre Tomt <andre@xxxxxxxx>, syrius.ml@xxxxxxxxxx, Damion de Soto <damion@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Netfilter Development Mailinglist <netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1111410890.1092.195.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1107123123.8021.80.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <0fcf01c5077f$579e4b80$6e69690a@RIMAS> <1107174142.8021.121.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <00c301c524b4$938cd240$6e69690a@RIMAS> <1110379135.1091.143.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1110416767.1111.76.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <025501c52552$2dbf87c0$6e69690a@RIMAS> <1110453757.1108.87.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <423B7BCB.10400@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1111410890.1092.195.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050106 Debian/1.7.5-1
jamal wrote:
As i was suspecting this is related to iptables breaking backwards
compatibility. Starting with 1.3.0 the target structure changed ;->
(right at the top is a new field called version)
I suspect the iptables folks maybe unaware that there are other users of
iptables and assume that anyone needing to use new iptables will
recompile everything from scratch. BAD! BAD!
I am ccing the necessary evil doers (Harald and Patrick - at least they
would know who the real evildoer is).

We'll try to keep this in mind in the future. We could move
the version field to the end, but I guess its already too
late. What do you think?

Regards
Patrick

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>