~alpine/devel

1

[alpine-devel] shorewall thoughts ... .

Details
Message ID
<521C65CD.6010700@gmail.com>
Sender timestamp
1377592781
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
Hey all,

I was wondering if it would be possible to reconsider upgrading the 
shorewall apk to the most current-stable version.

 From previous discussions I am aware of the fact that this must be done 
along the perl beast,
but on the other hand this a decision  that the user-admin has to make 
and consider.

I would prefer it to be there as an OPEN option.

Besides that IMHO the days that hw resources were somewhat limited as 
far as RAM and CPUs are concerned are probably over.

Thanks

Harry Lachanas.




---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>
Details
Message ID
<20130827125149.3576fa46@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org>
In-Reply-To
<521C65CD.6010700@gmail.com> (view parent)
Sender timestamp
1377600709
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 11:39:41 +0300
HL <freemail.grharry@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey all,
> 
> I was wondering if it would be possible to reconsider upgrading the 
> shorewall apk to the most current-stable version.
> 
>  From previous discussions I am aware of the fact that this must be done 
> along the perl beast,
> but on the other hand this a decision  that the user-admin has to make 
> and consider.
> 
> I would prefer it to be there as an OPEN option.

I agree. we should upgrade to latest shorewall and give users an option.

> 
> Besides that IMHO the days that hw resources were somewhat limited as 
> far as RAM and CPUs are concerned are probably over.

We have awall also which is much lighter on resources.

> 
> Thanks
> 
> Harry Lachanas.

-nc


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Reply to thread Export thread (mbox)