From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: [libnftnl PATCH v2] expr: Introduce nftnl_expr_fprintf() Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:11:45 +0200 Message-ID: <20171017121145.GA18793@salvia> References: <20171017110507.GA16060@salvia> <20171017112218.14539-1-phil@nwl.cc> <20171017113150.GA8818@salvia> <20171017120222.GW32305@orbyte.nwl.cc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: Phil Sutter , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:38682 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755766AbdJQMLt (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Oct 2017 08:11:49 -0400 Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (unknown [192.168.2.11]) by mail.us.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75BFEDA73F for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:11:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id 666C6DA861 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:11:48 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171017120222.GW32305@orbyte.nwl.cc> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 02:02:22PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: > Hi, > > Actually, I don't quite get the suggested change: > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 01:31:50PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > @@ -308,3 +307,7 @@ global: > > > > local: *; > > }; > > + > > +LIBNFTNL_6 { > > + nftnl_expr_fprintf; > > +} LIBMNL_5; > > Why LIBMNL_5? Shouldn't this be LIBNFTNL_5? Oh right :-) Neurons rollerskating here, sorry.