From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Ming-Ching Tiew" Subject: Re: ipt_random Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:15:54 +0800 Message-ID: <061001c58d03$3fdeee00$1280a8c0@newlife> References: <02ed01c58c43$cd9c7ed0$1280a8c0@newlife><034901c58cc8$d0828650$1280a8c0@newlife> <058a01c58cf9$dd3d88f0$1280a8c0@newlife> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org From: "Jan Engelhardt" > > >Too bad that's not how the patch-o-matic scripts are written. It will not > >patch the kernel source, if it did not follow certain directory structure. > > > >That's how the patch-o-matic 'runme --batch' behaves, if what I have > >tried is correct. > > I usually dont use runme, because I'm almost sure it creates rejectfiles > nonetheless given the kernel I use. So I copy the files and merge the *.ladd > files by hand. Voil`a. Note that I do use ipt_random actively, so it > definitely works on 2.6.x. > If you have small work you could copy here and there. As soon as you have a few patches to apply, it will become very laborious and error proned. That's the whole purpose of 'runme'. Any the contrary, I use 'runme' as it guarantees me certain minimum repeatable quality. Anyway, thanks for letting me know about the quality of the ipt_random.c on 2.6 kernel. I actually found another patch, https://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/ netfilter-devel/2004-November/017491.html Cheers.