From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58486) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SPZvy-0002VJ-KA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2012 09:49:40 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SPZvo-0007mH-Qc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2012 09:49:34 -0400 Received: from fmmailgate01.web.de ([217.72.192.221]:54262) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SPZvo-0007lp-Gv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 May 2012 09:49:24 -0400 Received: from moweb002.kundenserver.de (moweb002.kundenserver.de [172.19.20.108]) by fmmailgate01.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 979D01AD4C7A8 for ; Wed, 2 May 2012 15:49:22 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4FA13B4B.5000902@web.de> Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 10:48:59 -0300 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4FA13965.4070906@web.de> In-Reply-To: <4FA13965.4070906@web.de> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigC721FFB4445B16D6B6BAFFA6" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] slirp: Untangle TCPOLEN_* from TCPOPT_* List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= Cc: Blue Swirl , Paolo Bonzini , Lee Essen , qemu-devel@nongnu.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigC721FFB4445B16D6B6BAFFA6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2012-05-02 10:40, Andreas F=C3=A4rber wrote: > Am 02.05.2012 15:24, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: >>> But that would leave Illumos broken. >=20 > For the record, reverting would leave whatever Paolo was fixing broken > but would restore Illumos. >=20 >> I'd rather apply this one. >> >> Please do. The right solution for 1.2 is to understand the places in = which >> slirp cannot use netinet/tcp.h constants (the MSS for example), and >> otherwise use that header. >=20 > Jan, should I prepare a mechanical prefix addition as suggested by Blue= ? > Should we apply this ugly-but-least-intrusive build fix? Or do you have= > any other preference or idea? I'm fine with a minimal fix like you suggested. The renaming should probably be applied to a broader scope. So it's an exercise to be done systematically and without any hurry. Jan --------------enigC721FFB4445B16D6B6BAFFA6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk+hO1AACgkQitSsb3rl5xTrDwCfRNvPSZRxdG0O0IRxaVmxDIDu KjcAoIQGp5rDYF60H6/0wnluj/8s+6Ed =0Bpt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigC721FFB4445B16D6B6BAFFA6--