On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 02:46:38PM +, Johan Ribenfors wrote:
> Matt Johnston ucc.asn.au> writes:
>
> > This looks sensible (exiting if a -R forward fails when -N
> > is specified). I wonder if anyone would have problems if
> > they're using -N and multiple -L/-R options and don't mind
> > of
Matt Johnston ucc.asn.au> writes:
>
> This looks sensible (exiting if a -R forward fails when -N
> is specified). I wonder if anyone would have problems if
> they're using -N and multiple -L/-R options and don't mind
> of only some of them fail - maybe it should be a separate
> commandline flag.
