From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] add xtables-multi{32,64} recognition Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:32:41 +0200 Message-ID: <4DAD3A99.2010608@trash.net> References: <1303176233-14063-5-git-send-email-zenczykowski@gmail.com> <4DAD3749.1000208@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: =?UTF-8?B?TWFjaWVqIMW7ZW5jenlrb3dza2k=?= Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:33280 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751937Ab1DSHdD (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Apr 2011 03:33:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 19.04.2011 09:29, Maciej =C5=BBenczykowski wrote: >> What is the purpose of this? >=20 > Unfortunately not every 64-bit kernel version has had fully functiona= l > 32 bit backwards compatibility with userspace. As such, it is > sometimes necessary to ship a 32-bit userspace iptables for 32-bit > kernels and a 64-bit binary for 64-bit kernels - sometimes in the sam= e > OS image. >=20 > The way I've done this is ship both binaries, one named *32 and one > *64 and then have a launcher at * launch the appropriate one for the > running kernel. >=20 > To be fair, these kernels are pretty old at this point, OTOH, the > patch is rather trivial and harmless. Sure, but if you upgrade iptables on those systems, you can simply replace the wrapper script. I don't think it makes much sense to put this into the upstream version to handle compatibility for your specific case. The other patches look good to me. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-dev= el" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html