> On Jul 21, 2017, at 3:42 PM, li...@wrant.com wrote: > > Fri, 21 Jul 2017 12:33:31 -0700 Peter Faiman <peterfai...@gmail.com> >> # ./sysctl -p example.conf >> Peter > > Hi Peter, ansibles, > > No guarantee systems controls stay affixed, wrapper tools comply got it?
The point of sysctl -p is reloading from a file. So that you put controls in the file and load that file, exactly as happens in system startup. The whole point is to ensure consistency with system startup. True, securelevel throws a bit of a wrench in that, but this works for all other settings. > Wrap around as advised for a system operator, don't push for short cuts. It’s not a short cut. Ansible wants sysctl -p, I implemented sysctl -p exactly as Linux does it, using the OpenBSD /etc/rc code that actually applies sysctls from /etc/sysctl.conf. I never said anyone should use Ansible. I don't use it, I don't like it. But clearly this person is going to use it, so I might as well give them something that will do what they want, even if I don't agree with it. > Please, stop imposing your designs on our systems wasting precious time. I'm not imposing my designs on anyone. Someone on the mailing list needed the exact Linux behavior, so I spent 5 minutes on the train to work writing and testing a compatible tool. I already _specifically_ said I wrote a wrapper this way because it's the easiest way to be compatible without changing ANY OpenBSD code, or ANYTHING else about the OpenBSD system. In other words I deliberately chose to solve this problem in a way that imposes NOTHING on anyone else. > Kind regards, You should stop putting this at the bottom of your emails if you think it's acceptable to talk to others this way. When you send out half-baked responses that clearly demonstrate you did not bother to read what I said, you're the one wasting my time. Peter