Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-29 Thread Mikkel Bang
to make my rc.conf.local more sensible and consistent, i.e. not pf=YES sshd= named_flags= but rather pf=YES sshd=YES named=YES? How about something like this? # system options pf=YES # daemons sshd_flags= named_flags=

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-29 Thread Tony Abernethy
Mikkel Bang wrote: I'm just thinking that from a layman's perspective named_flags= doesn't make as much sense as named=YES if all you want to do is start named. The way it is right now seems more like monkey patching from the days before OpenBSD became popular. I acknowledge the whole it's been

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-29 Thread Simon Perreault
Le 2012-08-29 09:57, Mikkel Bang a écrit : If OpenBSD was on Git / at GitHub, youngins like me would have patched this baby up a long time ago. Sadly, a good argument against moving to Git. Simon

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-29 Thread bofh
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Mikkel Bang facebookman...@gmail.com wrote: I'm just thinking that from a layman's perspective named_flags= doesn't make as much sense as named=YES if all you want to do is start named. The way it is right now seems more like monkey patching from the days

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-29 Thread Peter Hessler
On 2012 Aug 29 (Wed) at 15:57:09 +0200 (+0200), Mikkel Bang wrote: :If OpenBSD was on Git / at GitHub, youngins like me would have patched :this baby up a long time ago. 1) Here's a nickle, go learn to use cvs. 2) We'd reject the patch anyways. -- Stop searching. Happiness is right next to

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-29 Thread Chris Bennett
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 11:22:38AM -0400, Simon Perreault wrote: Le 2012-08-29 09:57, Mikkel Bang a ?crit : If OpenBSD was on Git / at GitHub, youngins like me would have patched this baby up a long time ago. Sadly, a good argument against moving to Git. Simon Whatcha 'git agit gitting

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-29 Thread Ben Calvert
On Aug 29, 2012, at 6:57, Mikkel Bang facebookman...@gmail.com wrote: I'm just thinking that from a layman's perspective named_flags= doesn't make as much sense as named=YES if all you want to do is start named. I can't tell if you're trolling or not. Seriously, tho: is uninformed beginners

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-28 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2012-08-25, Mikkel Bang facebookman...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! Is there a way to make my rc.conf.local more sensible and consistent, i.e. not pf=YES sshd= named_flags= but rather pf=YES sshd=YES named=YES? How about something like this? # system options pf=YES # daemons

More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-25 Thread Mikkel Bang
Hello! Is there a way to make my rc.conf.local more sensible and consistent, i.e. not pf=YES sshd= named_flags= but rather pf=YES sshd=YES named=YES? Thanks! Mikkel

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-25 Thread Robert
On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 18:55:00 +0200 Mikkel Bang facebookman...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! Is there a way to make my rc.conf.local more sensible and consistent, i.e. not pf=YES sshd= named_flags= but rather pf=YES sshd=YES named=YES? Thanks! Mikkel pf doesn't have options

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-25 Thread Alexander Hall
On 08/25/12 21:08, Robert wrote: On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 18:55:00 +0200 Mikkel Bang facebookman...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! Is there a way to make my rc.conf.local more sensible and consistent, i.e. not pf=YES sshd= named_flags= but rather pf=YES sshd=YES named=YES? You may still want

Re: More sensible and consistent rc.conf.local

2012-08-25 Thread Theo de Raadt
(For sake of the argument: pfctl has options, maybe they should be a rc.conf option for it?) pfctl is not a daemon per se, as opposed to e.g. smtpd or httpd. As far as enabling pf and loading the ruleset, only a subset of the pfctl flags are of interest. Therefore, there is