On Mon, 4 Sep 2006, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
> This is in fact the same case as with the above, just with a pseudo-device
> instead of a physical device.
>
> BTW your statement that "Using ktrace(1)  can help you find what's going
> on inside a command, and to determine you what's being accessed that may
> cause the error message." is misleading. There is no need to use ktrace in
> the case mentioned. pfctl tells you what device node did it attempt to
> use. (/dev/pf)

Want to send me a patch to update the text?
I'm not 100% sure what you're suggesting to change...


  - Hubert