From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] [NETFILTER]: ebtables: expand/remove unneeded macros Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:05:14 +0100 Message-ID: <479846BA.6050308@trash.net> References: <47934659.50303@trash.net> <479349D3.6050103@trash.net> <1200839199.2868.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> <47935E7A.1000908@trash.net> <1200852441.2894.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Bart De Schuymer , Netfilter Developer Mailing List To: Jan Engelhardt Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:35322 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752435AbYAXIGH (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:06:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Jan 20 2008 19:07, Bart De Schuymer wrote: >> Op zo, 20-01-2008 te 18:34 +0100, schreef Jan Engelhardt: >>> "Ugh." I do not think ebtables(8) should depend on such macros. >>> iptables(8) does not do that either. >>> What good would those macros be for? It is not like the module names >>> would be changing anyway (one purpose of macros - to reduce the number >>> of places where you have to change things iff things change). >> We are talking about EBT_ENTRY_ITERATE and the like, right? >> I didn't see your patch, but even the kernel code uses the ITERATE >> macros more than once. >> > No, just the name macros: > > > (shortened) > diff --git a/include/linux/netfilter_bridge/ebt_802_3.h b/include/linux/netfilter_bridge/ebt_802_3.h > index a11b0c2..11421ca 100644 > --- a/include/linux/netfilter_bridge/ebt_802_3.h > +++ b/include/linux/netfilter_bridge/ebt_802_3.h > @@ -4,8 +4,6 @@ > #define EBT_802_3_SAP 0x01 > #define EBT_802_3_TYPE 0x02 > > -#define EBT_802_3_MATCH "802_3" I've folded the ebtables MODULES_DESCRIPTION part without this change and the {ip,ip6,x}_tables parts into your first patch to update the descriptions. Frankly, I don't care much about packet vs. Packet, but if you want to change the other descriptions again, please send that part seperately.