David Young wrote:
Make sure to have a look at all of the sites that call rt_replace_ifa(), because the callers may expect to manage IFA_ROUTE themselves. It would be too bad if we ship a worse 5.0 kernel than possible, but if you can workaround this defect in userland, now, instead of changing the kernel so late in the 5.0 release cycle, with unforeseen consequences, then we may ship a better 5.0 kernel than otherwise in the end! :-)
I agree.My patch to rtsock.c has now been proved to cause more damage than it tried to fix, so at the very least it should be reverted before 5.0.
I'm now starting to think that my initial reason to transfer the IFA_ROUTE flag was because of an issue with dhcpcd-5. I'll do some testing tomorrow against an unpatched kernel.
Thanks Roy