* [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel @ 2006-10-21 15:42 Michiel de Bruijne 2006-10-22 14:24 ` Chris Gianelloni 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Michiel de Bruijne @ 2006-10-21 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-releng Hi Gals, Guys, I was about to file a request/bug about including iptables support in genkernel. I noticed someone has filed this report already, but it was closed as a wontfix almost a year ago. The reason for this was that iptables shouldn't be forced on users. Personally I don't see building a few extra modules as forcing something on users, but that's a different debate. I can imagine, one year later with new insights and tools, it's now possible to include (optional) iptables support out of the box with genkernel. If I file a request/bug will it be closed as a wontfix? Regards, Michiel. -- gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel 2006-10-21 15:42 [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel Michiel de Bruijne @ 2006-10-22 14:24 ` Chris Gianelloni 2006-10-22 16:02 ` Michiel de Bruijne 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Chris Gianelloni @ 2006-10-22 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-releng [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1392 bytes --] On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 17:42 +0200, Michiel de Bruijne wrote: > Hi Gals, Guys, > > I was about to file a request/bug about including iptables support in > genkernel. I noticed someone has filed this report already, but it was closed > as a wontfix almost a year ago. The reason for this was that iptables > shouldn't be forced on users. Personally I don't see building a few extra > modules as forcing something on users, but that's a different debate. > > I can imagine, one year later with new insights and tools, it's now possible > to include (optional) iptables support out of the box with genkernel. If I > file a request/bug will it be closed as a wontfix? I've started maintaining the genkernel kernel configs pretty much exclusively. I see no problem with iptables support being added. The best would be if you attached a patch against the current configs, as it would be easier on me, as I actually have to apply them to two places (genkernel SVN, and releng kconfigs for 2007.0) for the next release. The main change is that (for at least x86/amd64) we're trying to make the default kernel, which is also used on the LiveCD, as generic as possible and as feature filled as possible. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel 2006-10-22 14:24 ` Chris Gianelloni @ 2006-10-22 16:02 ` Michiel de Bruijne 2006-10-23 12:17 ` Chris Gianelloni 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Michiel de Bruijne @ 2006-10-22 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-releng On Sunday 22 October 2006 16:24, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > I've started maintaining the genkernel kernel configs pretty much > exclusively. I see no problem with iptables support being added. The > best would be if you attached a patch against the current configs, as it > would be easier on me, as I actually have to apply them to two places > (genkernel SVN, and releng kconfigs for 2007.0) for the next release. > The main change is that (for at least x86/amd64) we're trying to make > the default kernel, which is also used on the LiveCD, as generic as > possible and as feature filled as possible. That's good to read. Currently there are two kernel configs used for (2.4 and 2.6). Features/modules are added and removed with every kernel release. Or entire sections are moved to different parts in the kernel dependency hierarchy (e.g. netfilter/iptables). There is also the problem that some modules wont build in a specific kernel version but build/run fine in another version of the kernel. I think if we want genkernel/livecd as feature filled as possible we should extend the default configs to a x.y.z scheme. A new kernel version is released about four times a year so this shouldn't be to hard to maintain. I'm willing to do the work (creating patches and maintaining future kernel configs), but do you agree and are willing to apply it? The next thing on my annoyance list is I need to put too many items in modules.autoload.d that should be handled in init-scripts (e.g. acpid and cpufreqd), but I deal with those later. -- gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel 2006-10-22 16:02 ` Michiel de Bruijne @ 2006-10-23 12:17 ` Chris Gianelloni 2006-10-23 14:00 ` Michiel de Bruijne 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Chris Gianelloni @ 2006-10-23 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-releng [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2743 bytes --] On Sun, 2006-10-22 at 18:02 +0200, Michiel de Bruijne wrote: > On Sunday 22 October 2006 16:24, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > I've started maintaining the genkernel kernel configs pretty much > > exclusively. I see no problem with iptables support being added. The > > best would be if you attached a patch against the current configs, as it > > would be easier on me, as I actually have to apply them to two places > > (genkernel SVN, and releng kconfigs for 2007.0) for the next release. > > The main change is that (for at least x86/amd64) we're trying to make > > the default kernel, which is also used on the LiveCD, as generic as > > possible and as feature filled as possible. > > That's good to read. > > Currently there are two kernel configs used for (2.4 and 2.6). > Features/modules are added and removed with every kernel release. Or entire > sections are moved to different parts in the kernel dependency hierarchy > (e.g. netfilter/iptables). There is also the problem that some modules wont > build in a specific kernel version but build/run fine in another version of > the kernel. > > I think if we want genkernel/livecd as feature filled as possible we should > extend the default configs to a x.y.z scheme. A new kernel version is > released about four times a year so this shouldn't be to hard to maintain. > I'm willing to do the work (creating patches and maintaining future kernel > configs), but do you agree and are willing to apply it? Sure. What would be best is if it looked for x.y.z first, then fell back to x.y, in the case of us not being as fast with the config as the kernel team with the kernel. ;] Another thing to realize is that while I will apply new configs/patches, I'm not planning on making a genkernel release for changes as minor as a new config. What I would suggest is that we make the "2.4" and "2.6" configs be equal to the latest config, with the x.y.z being preferred, if it exists. That way, when a new kernel comes out, it will start out using the last good config, until it gets updated with its own x.y.z config. > The next thing on my annoyance list is I need to put too many items in > modules.autoload.d that should be handled in init-scripts (e.g. acpid and > cpufreqd), but I deal with those later. Those should have bugs filed on their own. Truthfully, that stuff should all be loaded by the kernel automatically when the service is run. I don't have any ACPI/cpufreq stuff in my modules.autoload.d on this laptop, and both work fine for me. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel 2006-10-23 12:17 ` Chris Gianelloni @ 2006-10-23 14:00 ` Michiel de Bruijne 2006-10-23 19:23 ` Chris Gianelloni 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Michiel de Bruijne @ 2006-10-23 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-releng On Monday 23 October 2006 14:17, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > What would be best is if it looked for x.y.z first, then fell back to > x.y, in the case of us not being as fast with the config as the kernel > team with the kernel. ;] > > Another thing to realize is that while I will apply new configs/patches, > I'm not planning on making a genkernel release for changes as minor as a > new config. What I would suggest is that we make the "2.4" and "2.6" > configs be equal to the latest config, with the x.y.z being preferred, > if it exists. That way, when a new kernel comes out, it will start out > using the last good config, until it gets updated with its own x.y.z > config. Ok, do you want patches againt 3.4.2? -- gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel 2006-10-23 14:00 ` Michiel de Bruijne @ 2006-10-23 19:23 ` Chris Gianelloni 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Chris Gianelloni @ 2006-10-23 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-releng [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1290 bytes --] On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 16:00 +0200, Michiel de Bruijne wrote: > On Monday 23 October 2006 14:17, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > What would be best is if it looked for x.y.z first, then fell back to > > x.y, in the case of us not being as fast with the config as the kernel > > team with the kernel. ;] > > > > Another thing to realize is that while I will apply new configs/patches, > > I'm not planning on making a genkernel release for changes as minor as a > > new config. What I would suggest is that we make the "2.4" and "2.6" > > configs be equal to the latest config, with the x.y.z being preferred, > > if it exists. That way, when a new kernel comes out, it will start out > > using the last good config, until it gets updated with its own x.y.z > > config. > > Ok, do you want patches againt 3.4.2? 3.4.3, actually... I just added it this morning and it currently matches SVN, for the most part. You can also check http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/genkernel/trunk/ to see what the current SVN status is. I did update the kernel sources today to add lm_sensors and AGP/DRM support. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-10-23 19:23 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2006-10-21 15:42 [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel Michiel de Bruijne 2006-10-22 14:24 ` Chris Gianelloni 2006-10-22 16:02 ` Michiel de Bruijne 2006-10-23 12:17 ` Chris Gianelloni 2006-10-23 14:00 ` Michiel de Bruijne 2006-10-23 19:23 ` Chris Gianelloni
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox