Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 15 May 2021 09:23:33 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        ipfw@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 255704] Feature Request: ipfw: print time in ISO8601 or allow to pass time format string
Message-ID:  <bug-255704-8303-FiMdzOC8Ce@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-255704-8303@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-255704-8303@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D255704

--- Comment #3 from Lutz Donnerhacke <donner@FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to parv from comment #2)

I'm a bit confused.
My version of ipfw in 13-STABLE reacts to the option -T and -aT in the same
way.

```
# ipfw -T show
00100 5197969 654927673 1621070102 allow ip from any to any
# ipfw -aT show
00100 5198030 654934164 1621070105 allow ip from any to any
```

This is easy to postprocess i.e.

```
# ipfw -T show | perl -pe '
   next unless s/ +(\d+) +(\d+) +(\d+)/ XxX/;
   $d =3D localtime($3);
   if ($3 > 0) {
      s/XxX/$d/;
   } else {
      s/XxX/                        /
   };'
00100 Sat May 15 11:19:54 2021 allow ip from any to any
07110                          fwd tablearg,8000 tcp ...
07110                          fwd tablearg,8000 tcp ...
07210                          allow ip from any to any
65535                          deny ip from any to any
```

You may write you a wrapper script which is using the options you really ne=
ed.

Please don't get me wrong. The question is: "Is it worth the effort to incl=
ude
a special form of postprocessing into a system binary?"

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-255704-8303-FiMdzOC8Ce>