> > Or, maybe it would be better to add a second parameter to the existing > include statement: > > > > #(This is a required include) > > Include: filename.cfg > > #(This is an optional include) > > Include: filename.cfg optional > > > > I think I prefer the second way for backwards compatibility, although > > it depends on how MRTG currently parses the file. > > Either way is going to break if you run on an older version. The > current regex will fail to match if there is a second parameter after > the included file name.
I think this is something we'd have to live with - after all, when the NoHC directive was added for MRTG 2.16 it meant that cfgmaker-generated scripts broken older versions of MRTG. I'd prefer to extend the existing Include directive rather than add a new directive. However, whats more important is what Tobi wants to do, I guess :) Steve _______________________________________________ mrtg mailing list [email protected] https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/mrtg
