From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263969AbTJ1NXr (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2003 08:23:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263971AbTJ1NXr (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2003 08:23:47 -0500 Received: from tmr-02.dsl.thebiz.net ([216.238.38.204]:20485 "EHLO gatekeeper.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263969AbTJ1NXq (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2003 08:23:46 -0500 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Path: gatekeeper.tmr.com!davidsen From: davidsen@tmr.com (bill davidsen) Newsgroups: mail.linux-kernel Subject: Re: status of ipchains in 2.6? Date: 28 Oct 2003 13:13:34 GMT Organization: TMR Associates, Schenectady NY Message-ID: References: <200310280127.h9S1RM5d002140@napali.hpl.hp.com> X-Trace: gatekeeper.tmr.com 1067346814 26359 192.168.12.62 (28 Oct 2003 13:13:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@tmr.com Originator: davidsen@gatekeeper.tmr.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In article , Holger Schurig wrote: | > Unlike ipchains, iptables works perfectly fine, so perhaps we just | > need to update Kconfig to discourage ipchains on ia64 (and/or other | > 64-bit platforms)? | | Perhaps we simply drop ipchains support for good? Since it worked in early test versions, how 'bout we just unbreak it? Since the support has been in the kernel, and did work until it was recently broken, perhaps we could skip the "I don't need it" phase and fix the problem. -- bill davidsen CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.