In message: <3c1674c90906091012u26b0e823q57a7ea1f42eef...@mail.gmail.com>
Kip Macy <km...@freebsd.org> writes:
: > I think FLOWTABLE does nto belong into DEFAULTS. Really DEFAULTS was
: > meant for "You cannot boot without this" and if people start to weaken
: > it, DEFAULTS will soon be the new GENERIC. That said I am not sure it
: > belongs to GENERIC either.
:
: I can either push it in to GENERIC or I can change it to NOFLOWTABLE.
: If you want to remove it from GENERIC then we're going to have to have
: a lengthy discussion about what most FreeBSD users actually use and
: gut GENERIC as it stands now. The fact is, most FreeBSD users have
: sufficiently few peers that flowtable is a win over using the routing
: table on every lookup.
NO.
NOFLOWTABLE is bogus. Negative options are lame. We need to have
fewer of them rather than more.
Also, we do *NOT* want it to be default on *ALL* platforms, which is
what NOFLOWTABLE does.
It should be in GENERIC, on a per-platform basis, if it is really
ready for prime time. Embedded targets don't want this kind of stuff
at all. People do mix/match generic, and having all the options there
is the right way to do this. It is what people expect and having some
odd-ball options like this makes it harder. In fact, it makes it
harder to transition between releases because some options are
'magically on' and others need to be updated. It is a big pain. The
project has decided in the past to have the options be normal,
opt-in.
Please, make this a normal option, and we can have the discussion
about which config files it belongs in.
Warner
P.S. I see that you've made it a negative option later in the day
from this message. I'm formally requesting that you back that out and
make it a normal option.
_______________________________________________
svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
