Bug 21399
| Summary: | Handbook DHCP section doesn't mention bpf | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Documentation | Reporter: | dpelleg+bsd <dpelleg+bsd> | ||||
| Component: | Books & Articles | Assignee: | freebsd-doc (Nobody) <doc> | ||||
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||||||
| Severity: | Affects Only Me | ||||||
| Priority: | Normal | ||||||
| Version: | Latest | ||||||
| Hardware: | Any | ||||||
| OS: | Any | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
dpelleg+bsd
2000-09-19 14:40:01 UTC
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 06:31:33AM -0700, dpelleg+bsd@cs.cmu.edu wrote: > >Description: > The DHCP chapter in the handbook fails to say you'll need bpf compiled into your kernel. > If you simply follow the instructions in it (like I did), it won't work. Not until you > rebuild the kernel, that is. The attached patch should do it. I don't know if that big note about the bpf device I included is necessary, but both LINT and GENERIC tell the user to be aware of the consequences of using bpf, so I figured I might as well make it clear what those consequences are. Also, if you look at the patch, it looks like I screwed up indentation, but when the patch is actually applied, the indentation is correct (at least on my system). I have no idea why this is. And finally, just a question -- this patch turns a couple of paragraphs into a <listitem> within an <itemizedlist> and adjusts those paragraphs' indentation accordingly. Is it better to create two patches, one to make the paragraphs part of the list and then another with the whitespace change to make the section fit the style guide, or is it OK just to wrap the whole thing up in one patch like I did? Eric On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 10:47:48AM -0400, Eric Ogren wrote:
> The attached patch should do it. I don't know if that big note about the
<sigh>
And now the actual patch...
Eric
State Changed From-To: open->closed Fixed, thanks! |
