linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for February 3 (netfilter)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 09 Feb 2011 08:21:29 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
CC:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for February 3 (netfilter)

Am 04.02.2011 20:15, schrieb Randy Dunlap:
> On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 16:00:34 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Changes since 20110202:
> 
> When SYSCTL and PROC_FS and NETFILTER_NETLINK are not enabled:
> 
> net/built-in.o: In function `try_to_load_type':
> ip_set_core.c:(.text+0x3ab49): undefined reference to `nfnl_unlock'
> ip_set_core.c:(.text+0x3ab4e): undefined reference to `nfnl_lock'

Does this patch fix the problem?

View attachment "x" of type "text/plain" (425 bytes)