From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Green Subject: Re: Logging NAT translations? Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 11:16:43 -0400 Sender: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <87r7qpzi1w.fsf@ion.xlipstream.com> References: <87isc7on6q.fsf@ion.xlipstream.com> <20040801170153.GC14539@sunbeam2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: To: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org In-Reply-To: <20040801170153.GC14539@sunbeam2> (Harald Welte's message of "Sun, 1 Aug 2004 19:01:53 +0200") 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 --=-=-= Harald Welte writes: > then someone needs to do some porting/merging work... patches > appreciated ;) Ok... I'm happy to work on it if I can get some pointers on where/how development should happen. I'm guessing HEAD iptables, HEAD patch-o-matic-ng, linux-2.6.7? The requirements hierarchy is a pain for me to figure out. Shouldn't be too bad to generate a graphviz digraph for it though. For POM-NG, should I be doing: ./runme pending ./runme nfnetlink-ctnetlink-0.13 or should I walk through the deps in nfnetlink-ctnetlink-0.13/info, apply/fix all of those patches recursively. For fixing a single patch, what should the .orig tree be? The tree with all dependencies applied? Any guidance on tree mangagement would be appreciated. Thanks, Chris -- Chris Green Chicken's thinkin' --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBBDlricTuckgiWJ4oRAuSpAJ950p3h6opmAZh73BtUGKkUqBE0agCgiovb ZuC8Xm/qIv+WgAXo+PlLhkM= =3gQo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--