[firewalls] Notes about pf as a module

[Simon L. Nielsen]

On 2005.03.16 00:53:07 +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2005-03-15 21:43, Max Laier <max at love2party.net> wrote:
> > as per a discussion on -stable and a IPF related PR (kern/70401) - I'd
> > like to add a note about this problem in the PF documentation.  See
> > attachted diff for details.  IPF (and IPFW???) might need similar, but
> > that's not my field of expertise ;)
> 
> > +
> > +      <note>
> > +	<para>The module assumes the presence of <literal>options
> > +	  INET</literal> and <literal>device bpf</literal>.  Unless
> > +	  <literal>NOINET6</literal> (for example in &man.make.conf.5;) was
> > +	  defined during the build, it also requires <literal>options
> > +	  INET6</literal>.</para>
> > +      </note>
> 
> I think the NO_XXX options are spelled consistently with an underscore
> these days.

That is only in -CURRENT, which the Handbook does not cover.
[45]-STABLE uses NOINET6.

-- 
Simon L. Nielsen
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/attachments/20050317/8a233446/attachment.sig>