xiaoxiang781216 commented on PR #18260: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/18260#issuecomment-3821325849
> Frankly speaking, the NOxxx_FORWARD is quite confusing, although the purpose is to backward older code. Most user will consider upgrade nuttx app and kernel at the same time. The flag without "NO" flag is the one that more user friendly. For long term consideration, nuttx should user flag without "NO". Which rule has higher priority in nuttx world? Do right thing or backward : ) If you set a route rule manually(the default is no rule and no routing), what you want is that the rule is active immediately. But if we don't use NOxxx_FORWARD, but xxx_FORWARD, which mean user need set flag xxx_FORWARD additionally. BTW, since this flag doesn't exist on Linux/FreeBSD, it's better to enable forward by default to compatible with other OS. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
