These are the required patches to FreeBSD to get bong-kmods and bong-utils
to work. They require you rebuild kernel (the ngctl patch is in stable/14 now).
This is here to make it easy for me to track and for others to try bong-kmods / bong-utils.
I am working on getting the barest of minimum set into FreeBSD-16, the current development branch. While I also run them on FreeBSD-14 and FreeBSD-15 (stable), I do not have any plans to get any of these patches backported to FreeBSD-14. As development moves to FreeBSD-16 I will at some point cease maintaining stable-14.
| Patch | Review | Commit | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0001 | D44615 | 86a6393 | ng_bridge: allow to automatically assign numbers to new hooks |
| 0002 | N/A | 46f38a6 | netgraph: Exit the net epoch to handle control messages |
| 0003 | D50241 | 72d01e6 | Teach ngctl to attach and run itself in a jail. |
| 0004 | not ready | Teach netgraph to parse IPv6 addresses | |
| 0005 | not ready | Always call if_ioctl for virtual interfaces. |
You can tell if a patch is merged by it having a commit.
not ready means I don't have the node that requires the patch yet. The patches themselves
are ready.
The second was not written by me, it was a bug I caused/exposed with my first patch. The bug was mentioned and discussed in the same review D44615 as it broke automated tests.
There is one more you patch you need for FreeBSD-14 if you build your world without jail support (EINCONCEIVABLE!): 685e60e. Sigh, that makes 100% of my commits to date required a follow on fix for something I feel like I should have caught myself.
The examples in bong-utils assume you have 86a6393 and 46f38a6.
The jeiface utility in bong-utils assumes you have 72d01e6. Which you
should anyway for FreeBSD-14.4 on.
Both ng_siit and ng_nat64 will require the last two patches. There is no
way to use them without these.
My plan, if everything in table is merged, is to make 2 ports for bong-kmods and bong-utils.
I won't put 0004.patch or 0005.patch up for review until the nodes that use them are ready. 0004.patch should not be controversial. 0005.patch uses the same flag that ng_iface(4) uses and I will not be surprised if I'm requested to use a new flag instead (which is fine).
I don't think these patches are controversial. Whereas the nodes and utilities in bong-kmods / bong-utils already appear so. I put up a review for ng_wormhole(4) and ngportal but have abandoned them in preference of bong-kmods / bong-utils.
Patches are unimaginatively named 0001.patch, 0002.patch, etc. for the order they
should be applied to your source tree.
I only update this when I update the systems I have still using FreeBSD-14 (all on 14/stable). So the patches may need help to apply cleanly.
The patches get the same numbers as 14/stable so if its missing here its merged.