Bug 106394 - missing kernel symbols for IPV6 functions in qeth
Summary: missing kernel symbols for IPV6 functions in qeth
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3
Classification: Red Hat
Component: kernel
Version: 3.0
Hardware: s390
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Pete Zaitcev
QA Contact: Brian Brock
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2003-10-06 18:14 UTC by Ingolf Salm
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:06 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-05-13 17:41:24 UTC


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Remove in6_dev_get from qeth (46.55 KB, patch)
2003-10-06 18:29 UTC, Pete Zaitcev
no flags Details | Diff

Description Ingolf Salm 2003-10-06 18:14:16 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)

Description of problem:
Red Hat did not accept the addition of 5 symbols, which are required for IPv6 
support in qeth. 

Please contact Bob Johnson for more information.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.recompile with IPv6 support
2.
3.
    

Additional info:

Comment 1 Pete Zaitcev 2003-10-06 18:28:27 UTC
An alternative exists, although it is somewhat intrusive relatively
to qeth. I sent it for review by Utz Bacher on 9/23/2003. He replied
on 9/29 with:

 Re. the large patch you sent -- the idea sounds feasible, but I need some
 more days. I won't be a change short-term (i.e. RHEL 3), will it? Our test
 guys would need to go over it accurately anyway.


Comment 2 Pete Zaitcev 2003-10-06 18:29:53 UTC
Created attachment 94952 [details]
Remove in6_dev_get from qeth

Comment 4 Pete Zaitcev 2003-11-13 21:26:47 UTC
Received message from Utz today:

------
Re. the list management. We concluded that we can't contain the test
effort
to guarantuee that it won't cause any customer problems, despite any first
tests and review didn't reveal anything worrysome. Therefore we say:
rather
want we qeth to be more or less stable as proven since 2000, than capable
of IPv6. We will however adopt the code and incorporate into our 2.6
changes (my personal opinion is, that there are quite some changes in the
2.6 qeth to come).


Comment 10 Pete Zaitcev 2005-05-13 17:41:24 UTC
Wontfix-ing and adding Jan to cc: in case he has a comment.



Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.