From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jim Gifford Subject: Re: Use of Kernel Headers Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:48:42 -0700 Sender: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <4123C0AA.7080708@jg555.com> References: <4122743A.7020309@jg555.com> <4122EADA.7030501@jg555.com> <4123AD42.8050803@jg555.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Netfilter Developer Return-path: To: Henrik Nordstrom In-Reply-To: Errors-To: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Jim Gifford wrote: > >> So would the proper course of action to be to remove the kernel >> directory from the iptables Makefile? or is there more to it. > > > Make it optional in the Makefile and make sure > include/linux/netfilter* is up to date. > > There is still value in allowing iptables to compile using the kernel > headers, especially so during development of a new extensions but also > to better match the kernel tree. > > Regards > Henrik > Doesn't patch-o-matic update the ones in iptables-version/include/linux? So the the kernel and the iptables are built from the same headers? (Is this desired) Or would it benefit iptables to include all the updated headers in iptables-version/include/linux? I don't mean to be pest on this, I just want the best solution possible for anyone who uses iptables. -- ---- Jim Gifford maillist@jg555.com