On 05/21/2010 06:43 AM, Kinkie wrote: > To avoid risking this to happen again, i'll do more frequent interim > merges while using trunk to baseline the output. > > Any objections?
I do not really know what you mean. If you are comfortable with your changes, post your changes for review, and nobody objects to a commit, you should commit your changes to trunk. IMO, we should not post and commit half-baked or poorly-scoped parts of a bigger project because they would be difficult to review without proper context. Reviewing large, complex changes is also difficult but I would still prefer to review and commit self-contained changes. Cheers, Alex. > On 5/10/10, Henrik Nordström <hen...@henriknordstrom.net> wrote: >> mån 2010-05-10 klockan 18:13 +0200 skrev Kinkie: >>>>> revno: 10425 >>>>> committer: Francesco Chemolli <kin...@squid-cache.org> >>>>> branch nick: trunk >>>>> timestamp: Sun 2010-04-25 23:40:51 +0200 >>>>> message: >>>>> Interim merge from autoconf-refactor feature-branch. >>>> Kinkie, could you please check that netfilter-based interception proxies >>>> are still supported? >>> Will do ASAP (probably tomorrow). >> I have added back the missing define for LINUX_NETFILTER, but this is >> the second odd thing in the autoconf refactor merge. Can you please do a >> full review of your merge to see if there is anything else that's odd? >> >>>> It would also be nice to get rid of libcap and TPROXY warnings when the >>>> user wants just netfilter-based interception proxy support and is >>>> willing to --disable the rest. In Squid v3.1, we now get these >>>> irrelevant (for the said configuration) warnings: >>> I'll check. >> trunk does not even have a configure option for controlling TPROXY. It's >> assumed to always be available by configure.in, and disabled in compiled >> code based on system header defines. >> >> Also the libcap warning message is a bit misguided. It's not only about >> TPROXY but also about security. >> >> Regards >> Henrik >> >> > >