CML 1 is ok

CML 1 is ok

[mirabilos]

Sorry, no gpm, so handquoting:
- CML 1 works ok
for me too
- menuconfig is great
it requires ncurses, but _this_ piece of software almost
anyone has. and if not I use make [old]config.
- xconfig
I never tested.

- python
what's that?
- upgrading
gcc - 2.7.2.3 was ok, egcs and 2.9x I dont like.
So I wait for 3.0 (which seems better).

netfilter: I _liked_ ipfwadm
because I hate to always re-learn when a new kernel comes out.
our company will soon ship a product still using ipfwadm (I
started with 2.0.33, going to .36 and 2.4.0-testX).
It's a pity this M$ism to not support it forever (they just
stopped supporting DOS! and GW-BASIC *snief*)

-mirabilos

PS: Don't answer plz as I'll be offline for a time.
    _And_ I mean this honest, even it might considered sp.m

-- 
by telnet

Re: CML 1 is ok

[Daniel Stone]

On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 12:00:28AM +0200, mirabilos wrote:
> netfilter: I _liked_ ipfwadm
> because I hate to always re-learn when a new kernel comes out.

Netfilter is going to stay. Rusty knew from early on in ipchains development
that the whole concept was wrong, but Alan told him to continue on, get it
into 2.2, and then do a new one for 2.4. There's a document detailing this
somewhere, I just can't forget where.

> our company will soon ship a product still using ipfwadm (I
> started with 2.0.33, going to .36 and 2.4.0-testX).
> It's a pity this M$ism to not support it forever (they just
> stopped supporting DOS! and GW-BASIC *snief*)

This is entirely incorrect and FUD. If enable Netfilter, look in the
Netfilter options, disable conntrack and IP tables support, you have
(*gasp!*) ipchains compatability, as well as (*ohmygod!*) ipfwadm
compatability.
 
> -mirabilos
> 
> PS: Don't answer plz as I'll be offline for a time.
>     _And_ I mean this honest, even it might considered sp.m

The FUD has to be corrected.

-- 
Daniel Stone
daniel@kabuki.openfridge.net