On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 18:58 +0100, Martin Hejl wrote:
> > I agree with you, that the main usage scenario is to build a network
> > appliance
> > with LEAF and most of them also acting as firewall.
> >
> > Anyway I think it has grown from a "firewall" to a "framework".
> That's something I have
Hi Mike,
> "LEAF - Linux Embedded Appliance Framework"
>
> Everyone,
> We seem to have agreement on a name switch from Firewall to Framework. I
> think we can make this change now, and continue work on a description
> for later adoption. Is this acceptable?
fine with me
Martin
Hi all,
this is a little depressing. After spending years (and tons of emails)
discussing the need for a kernel 2.6 version of LEAF, there has been no
response on this list on the topic. Is somebody actually interested in
continued work on that image (and has just not had an issue with it what
I'v
On Fri, 2008-03-07 at 21:56 +0100, Martin Hejl wrote:
> this is a little depressing. After spending years (and tons of emails)
> discussing the need for a kernel 2.6 version of LEAF, there has been no
> response on this list on the topic. Is somebody actually interested in
> continued work on that
Hi Mike,
>> I didn't expect a storm of activity - but I (perhaps foolishly) expected
>> some sort of response. I'm not looking for a "good job, well done"
>> response - but some sort of feedback that somebody is actually giving
>> the latest developments a try would be helpful. Without any kind of
On Friday 07 March 2008 18:55:23 Mike Noyes wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 18:58 +0100, Martin Hejl wrote:
> > > I agree with you, that the main usage scenario is to build a network
> > > appliance with LEAF and most of them also acting as firewall.
> > >
> > > Anyway I think it has grown from a "f
