On September 22, 2019 11:14:01 AM CDT, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev <lfs-dev@lists.linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: >On 9/21/19 11:52 PM, DJ Lucas via lfs-dev wrote: >> >> >> On 9/21/2019 11:42 PM, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: >>> >>> I wonder if the firewalld authors have considered the case of a >kernel >>> without modules. I don't know of any of the major distros that do >not >>> use modules. User configured kernels are a relatively rare >situation >>> (not for us of course). You can make a case for saying the not >>> building any modules but enabling module support is a >misconfiguration. >> >> I expect not. But they allow masquerading, NAT, etc, as well as >direct >> rules in their tables, so they expect that it can be used as a >> standalone configuration tool for a dedicated firewall. >>> >>> What we have is: >>> >>> Install the modules, if the kernel configuration uses them: >>> make modules_install >>> >>> Perhaps a simple rewording to: >>> >>> Install the modules, unless module support has been disabled in the >>> kernel configuration: >>> >>> Or reversing: >>> >>> Unless module support has been disabled in the kernel configuration, >>> install the modules with: >>> >> >> I like the second better. > >OK, done. > > -- Bruce > >-- >http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev >FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ >Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Thanks Bruce. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
