[OpenWrt-Devel] Any interest in a 'ct' iperf3?
ynezz at true.cz
Thu Oct 31 08:50:22 EDT 2019
Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com> [2019-10-29 06:23:52]:
> The original SO_BINDTODEVICE patches were offered upstream
> and there is no interest.
It seems like there's finally some interest and you do a good job over there.
> My recent changes would need rebasing to clean them up before upstreaming,
> and I am not going to spend any serious time on that since I'd still have to
> run my own tree to get the SO_BINDTODEVICE patches and anything else not
> accepted upstream.
I think, that there's no need for iperf3-ct package. In general, I would like
to move iperf3 to package feeds, where I think it belongs.
I assume, that nobody is going to object against any additional upstreamable
patches on top of iperf3 package if they provide widely useful
features/improvements and fixes. It should be enough to just put relevant link
to the upstream PR/patchwork/mailinglist to get them included.
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
More information about the openwrt-devel