From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Jones Subject: pptp-conntrack-nat will not apply to 2.4.29 - Workaround Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 01:45:06 -0600 Message-ID: <41F20482.4090300@hivemynd.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: To: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Hello devel-list! I was attempting to bake a 2.4.29 kernel this weekend and ran into a problem with applying the pptp-conntrack-nat patch from patch-o-matic-ng-20040621 and as well from the svn version 3605. The iptables source is for 1.2.11 The error from patch-o-matic ./runme is: "unable to find ladd slot in src /usr/src/linux-2.4.29/net/ipv4/netfilter/Config.in" I compared the Config.in files from a clean 2.4.28 to the one from 2.4.29, and the only difference: # Output of: diff --normal /linux-2.4.28-clean/net/ipv4/netfilter/Config.in /linux-2.4.29-clean/net/ipv4/netfilter/Config.in 69d68 < bool ' NAT of local connections (READ HELP)' CONFIG_IP_NF_NAT_LOCAL I got the pptp-conntrack-nat patch to apply by simply adding that line back to the /net/ipv4/netfilter/Config.in that is included with the 2.4.29 sources. The problem is the match line in the: /patch-o-matic-ng-XXXX/pptp-conntrack-nat/linux/net/ipv4/netfilter/Config.in.ladd_2 file is looking for: bool ' NAT of local connections (READ HELP)' CONFIG_IP_NF_NAT_LOCAL in the /net/ipv4/netfilter/Config.in file, and it is no longer there. I don't know enough about the structure of the Config.in files to suggest an appropriate, permanent solution :( I then remove the unneeded line before compiling the kernel sources. PS: The nat-reservations patch is incompatible with the pptp-conntrack-nat patch, perhaps a check in the pom-ng could prevent people from accidentally "shooting themselves in the foot" with these two? :)