DJ Lucas wrote: > Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > Just to clarify, the later rules will continue to process and they are > cumulative. This has been the case for some time now. I don't remember > the version where it changed, actually I think it was 057, but I'm not > sure and it doesn't matter anyway. To get the old functionality, you > can add 'OPTIONS="last_rule"' to the last rule that you want to be > interpreted. > > And this is where it gets hairy for me, but if I understand it > correctly, that option could have a nasty side effect. ISTM that rules > need to be very specific if you use it, else you may break something > else down the chain. IOW, I _think_ that a very open rule, like one > that contains just a subsystem, a group, and the last_rule option, could > choke the rest in the chain that match the subsystem, but I'm not > positive. Others probably know better than I, but I felt an explanation > was in order as opposed to the strait answer. I've been very careful > with that option on my own system, but if anybody can confirm or deny my > suspicion, it'd be appreciated.
I spent a fair amount of time reading about this today. From the documentation, if the NAME field is specified and the matching fields are all satisfied, the process names the node and stops. It also does any earlier action that was specified that did not have a NAME field. Yes, with wildcards in the matching fields, you have to be careful. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
