From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.netfilter.org (mail.netfilter.org [217.70.190.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3200313D503 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 2025 20:36:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.190.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756326997; cv=none; b=G67Wro/+eQplF37OSempdL2mDlde7hvkzZ1rIGXk5UBe2lN/6qLgz1jYvIVJEMqnKr4No50nfcNidG4rgQ6jLKf2PSkSV+bCdSQxqTmpEGAZ7myx5U1+oCQzXIeyxB19Cf75EFYgvHGnckaPqzIy2Xt0hz9FfFWiiAd1CT5HjRE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756326997; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ca0yrPkBluoif21csSEOPO07nuT+iylWIln2P6ZIkQ4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=a4JEQEb7j3D+/c6BrTMdomCX7iTTXhpKCuUCSwZhmp9yys3KYMCDgtoKC+9XxbykGvG6sPF2wxfOj1qgQNdXAmh8u0XFjSItlElVnimmjYO2gZl8/fpnh8p9o/eECWdCT1VQDfydmfiiZ32G2V8JnnR/uAE2S4XsqTFfR1dY8UA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=netfilter.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=netfilter.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netfilter.org header.i=@netfilter.org header.b=u9XwwX3K; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netfilter.org header.i=@netfilter.org header.b=u9XwwX3K; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.190.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=netfilter.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=netfilter.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netfilter.org header.i=@netfilter.org header.b="u9XwwX3K"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netfilter.org header.i=@netfilter.org header.b="u9XwwX3K" Received: by mail.netfilter.org (Postfix, from userid 109) id DF50D60265; Wed, 27 Aug 2025 22:36:31 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netfilter.org; s=2025; t=1756326991; bh=naDSNOtFIOH38YqrshSrG3htWo4cGrCqjz/2XMqdikI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=u9XwwX3KfZG6XEDuN0+LL8atuXnJ3HljeT497aHt5MMhbULVc2JEikXsEXt+jhhCR no/JDqy0MeK2RMH0eazSEcpvdK19NNsG6GENxuAhIZs/7u08ETYitOXzfGJviv26p4 8/ddHnvfTSm7zoqOEUtRg35TReVnUNGM+bgZTxsiy13p2xb/lTe02yoPHS9orfnHgB qQZBdHO9Gm3uvAMVutIZkybfJ0h8YkGG7WmUO+QkXuTpRXHEyhny9ZDzKFCm5DT6Nd AGHYUsmjf22nAOBWzjY1ErSvhIenxkmHxVwhZMrzo6Gw7lyJxQ+LXrOiyICrOp3kRg gSq5S0IUBgL+w== X-Spam-Level: Received: from netfilter.org (mail-agni [217.70.190.124]) by mail.netfilter.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2471460255; Wed, 27 Aug 2025 22:36:31 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netfilter.org; s=2025; t=1756326991; bh=naDSNOtFIOH38YqrshSrG3htWo4cGrCqjz/2XMqdikI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=u9XwwX3KfZG6XEDuN0+LL8atuXnJ3HljeT497aHt5MMhbULVc2JEikXsEXt+jhhCR no/JDqy0MeK2RMH0eazSEcpvdK19NNsG6GENxuAhIZs/7u08ETYitOXzfGJviv26p4 8/ddHnvfTSm7zoqOEUtRg35TReVnUNGM+bgZTxsiy13p2xb/lTe02yoPHS9orfnHgB qQZBdHO9Gm3uvAMVutIZkybfJ0h8YkGG7WmUO+QkXuTpRXHEyhny9ZDzKFCm5DT6Nd AGHYUsmjf22nAOBWzjY1ErSvhIenxkmHxVwhZMrzo6Gw7lyJxQ+LXrOiyICrOp3kRg gSq5S0IUBgL+w== Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 22:36:28 +0200 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Cc: jengelh@inai.de, phil@nwl.cc Subject: Re: [PATCH nft] build: disable --with-unitdir by default Message-ID: References: <20250827140214.645245-1-pablo@netfilter.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 04:46:17PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > Hi, > > Cc'ing Phil, Jan. > > Excuse me my terse proposal description. > > Extension: This is an alternative patch to disable --with-unitdir by > default, to address distcheck issue. > > I wonder also if this is a more conservative approach, this should > integrate more seamlessly into existing pipelines while allowing > distributors to opt-in to use this. > > But maybe I'm worrying too much and it is just fine to change defaults > for downstream packagers. I'm going to proceed with this approach to release nftables 1.1.5, if there is a need to refine, please just follow up. Thanks.