Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 10:30:29 -0500 From: Bob Johnson <bob@eng.ufl.edu> To: stable@freebsd.org Cc: patrick@stealthgeeks.net Subject: Re: firewall config (CTFM) Message-ID: <3C596315.576987D0@eng.ufl.edu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, January 28, 2002, at 03:10 , Patrick Greenwell wrote: >> in RELENG_4 from 5 Nov, /etc/defaults/rc.conf reads: >> -snip- >> firewall_enable="NO" # Set to YES to enable firewall >> functionality >> firewall_script="/etc/rc.firewall" # Which script to run to set up the >> firewall >> -snip- >> >> change the first line to read: >> firewall_enable="NO" # set to YES to enable running of the >> following firewall script So would it cause much breakage to rename 'firewall_enable' to "firewall_script_enable" some time in the near future, and leave the behavior otherwise unchanged? E.G. firewall_script_enable="NO" # Set to YES to load a firewall setup script firewall_script="/etc/rc.firewall" # Location of firewall setup script If I understand the issues correctly, this ought to give enough clue without breaking existing behavior, except for the unfortunate side effects of the variable name change. But that's why you read UPDATING, right? And I suppose that for some transition period (i.e. until 4.6R) both names could be supported, with a note that 'firewall_enable' is deprecated. Or simply don't mention it at all in the config files, just support it in the appropriate script. - Bob To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C596315.576987D0>