On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:13:33PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > I hadn't actually seen that article before. It's worth noting that > since shorewall doesn't contain any library dependencies, you can > usually grab the shorewall package from unstable and install it on a > stable system without any trouble. That's what I do on all my complex > firewalls, eliminating the problem of the old packages in stable. (The > simple desktop-to-DSL NAT firewalls that go all over the place run > quite happily with the stable packages. I think I even still have a > couple still running shorewall 2.x, and they probably haven't even > been rebooted since that was current - their function is so trivial > that there's just no reason to bother upgrading them) > Right. I will add a note about pinning to the version in unstable.
> Uncertain how this will work with shorewall-perl, I can't tell until > Lorenzo gets around to packaging it. But I don't forsee any particular > difficulties in doing the same thing. > I agree. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________ Shorewall-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users
