Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 13:48:15 -0500 From: Jason Hellenthal <jhell@DataIX.net> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sysctl description spillover and also setting the sysctl ? Message-ID: <20111130184815.GA70174@DataIX.net> In-Reply-To: <201111301152.47002.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20111125073630.GC7915@DataIX.net> <201111301152.47002.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:52:46AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > On Friday, November 25, 2011 2:36:30 am Jason Hellenthal wrote: > > > > Found a troubling result of the following and figured someone might want to > take a look. > > > > Pay close attention to the output and behavior. > > > > sysctl net.inet.udp.blackhole=0 > > sysctl net.inet.udp.blackhole > > sysctl -d net.inet.udp.blackhole=1 > > sysctl net.inet.udp.blackhole > > > > > > Is this expected ? should it not just display the description instead of > adjusting ? as well not display the description like it is adjusting the > description too ? > > Hah, cute. It should probably fail with an error if you do something like > that, yes. > Yeah thats what I thought about it to but the more I thought about it, if it just displayed the values changing instead of the description when =N is supplied I think that would be acceptable to. 0 -> 1 in this case. Or possibly sys.oid: 0 -> 1 # <Description> since sysctl.conf(5) also takes comments like that. Not really thats something at the top of the list for fixes though. Low fruit. Food for thought.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111130184815.GA70174>