Re: xtables 1.31 compilation errors

[Mr Dash Four <mr.dash.four@googlemail.com>]

>>> Of course, there are also commercial support options available if you
>>> prefer more QA.
>>>       
>> So, in order to get xtables to at least compile I have to get a
>> commercial support?! Really?! I dread the day you take over from
>> Patrick McHardy then - I really do!
>>     
>
> You mix up the Xtables core with Xtables-addons. The latter had the
> compile issue, but Patrick has nothing to do with Xtables-addons.
>   
You know exactly what I meant, so don't try to wriggle out of it.

> N.B.: To bring you up to date with the beer-free software: if someone
> feels a project needs more attention, they are to invest in it. If
> they do not come forward with patches, the public assumes they have
> other capabilities, and so, as a running gag, money spending is
> proposed.
>   
Save your beer-free-software teachings for someone else - you are in no 
position to try and educate me!

I've spotted 2 bugs in the current git tree of xtables (one of which was 
in the *released* version of ipset) and I asked for help on how to 
resolve them. In the meantime I did find a solution, which I posted earlier.

You tried to send me down blind alleys and basically acting smart a**e 
instead of providing a solution - the aforementioned bug with ALIGN 
wasn't something new to you - you already knew what the problem was and, 
most importantly, how to fix it, though you did not consider it 
necessary to let me know that, but to point me to google search and some 
obscure bug submission on gentoo instead.

>>> Releases are checked for whether the kernel modules compile with
>>> all kernel versions. Userspace compilation testing is limited to
>>> what I run. The rest is done happily by people more familiar with
>>> specific choices of distros. That is how the ecosystem works, and
>>> it usually works.
>>>       
>> The key word being 'usually' I presume, eh? Don't tell me you were
>> able to compile this code, because I won't believe you. I have
>> downloaded xtables with the *released* version of ipset (which
>> happens to be 4.5)
>>     
>
> I was meaning: a _released_ version _of xtables-addons_.
>   
The bug with IP_NF_SET_HASHSIZE was in the released version if ipset and 
not xtables and that is what I meant with my previous post.

> Yes, I know about the current git HEAD state. Happened to slip on
> compiling state 5bcdf7f. Big deal — Errare humanum est.
>   
I have no issue with errors being present in the git source tree - no 
software is ever perfect. I, however, have issues with you asking for 
'commercial support' (i.e. begging for money) in order to get a code 
which simply compiles and also sending me down blind alleys when you 
knew how to fix the problem I requested help for.

> Fixed now..
>   
So, wouldn't it have been easier for you to just point out how to fix 
this as soon as I posted about this bug, instead of harping on about 
commercial support, google search, gentoo bug submission and the 
difference between xtables and xtables-addons?!