From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Mar 24 22:52:11 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3BE21065670
	for <freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 22:52:10 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from kudzu@tenebras.com)
Received: from mail-qy0-f200.google.com (mail-qy0-f200.google.com
	[209.85.221.200])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3A648FC16
	for <freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 22:52:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by qyk38 with SMTP id 38so927090qyk.9
	for <freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 15:52:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.219.143 with SMTP id hu15mr3863182qcb.12.1269469360242; 
	Wed, 24 Mar 2010 15:22:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <hoe0o3$lek$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <hoe0o3$lek$1@dough.gmane.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 15:22:40 -0700
Message-ID: <813887681003241522r3e124c43m2c0dd2a3d280da08@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Sierchio <kudzu@tenebras.com>
To: Marcin Wisnicki <mwisnicki+freebsd@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5
Cc: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ipfw: missing action
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions <freebsd-ipfw.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ipfw>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ipfw-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 22:52:11 -0000

I'm really distressed about the state of ipfw development.  Is there no test
harness?  Rather than becoming more mature and stable, I think it's in the
weeds these days.

- M

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Marcin Wisnicki <
mwisnicki+freebsd@gmail.com <mwisnicki%2Bfreebsd@gmail.com>> wrote:

> Another victim of recent MFC:
>
> # ipfw -n add 00100 set 2 allow all from any to any via lo0
> ipfw: missing action
>
> Bug also exists on head.
> Someone should add "write IPFW testsuite" to FreeBSD project ideas ;)
>
> diff -ruN /usr/src/sbin/ipfw/ipfw2.c /home/marcin/p/bugfix/ipfw/ipfw2.c
> --- /usr/src/sbin/ipfw/ipfw2.c  2010-03-24 04:19:34.000000000 +0100
> +++ /home/marcin/p/bugfix/ipfw/ipfw2.c  2010-03-24 22:07:33.000000000 +0100
> @@ -2656,7 +2656,7 @@
>        }
>
>        /* [set N]      -- set number (0..RESVD_SET), optional */
> -       if (av[0] && !av[1] && _substrcmp(*av, "set") == 0) {
> +       if (av[0] && av[1] && _substrcmp(*av, "set") == 0) {
>                int set = strtoul(av[1], NULL, 10);
>                if (set < 0 || set > RESVD_SET)
>                        errx(EX_DATAERR, "illegal set %s", av[1]);
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ipfw
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ipfw-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>