| 1 |
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 17:38, Pandu Poluan <pandu@××××××.info> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Silly me... |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 17:23, Pandu Poluan <pandu@××××××.info> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> 1. Should I file a bugreport for xtables-addons-1.39? |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> 2. Or should I request for xtables-addons-1.41 in the portage tree? |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> [1] http://sourceforge.net/projects/xtables-addons/files/Xtables-addons/ |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Upstream's 1.41 already incorporated the necessary fixes for |
| 16 |
> xtables-addons to be compilable on kernel 3.2/3.3: |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> http://xtables-addons.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=xtables-addons/xtables-addons;a=commitdiff;h=076610e3af86b4b3f87f9c7811d36e38ec8a39cd |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> So there's just one question: Why haven't the package maintainer pull |
| 21 |
> xtables-addons-1.41 into the portage tree? |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Bugs #397749, #403749, and #405197, apparently. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Rgds, |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
FdS Pandu E Poluan |
| 30 |
~ IT Optimizer ~ |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
• LOPSA Member #15248 |
| 33 |
• Blog : http://pepoluan.tumblr.com |
| 34 |
• Linked-In : http://id.linkedin.com/in/pepoluan |
Archives