On 1/13/19 9:58 AM, Bruno Friedmann wrote: >>> But perhaps instead of just warn the user, and perhaps got people stuck >>> out of their boxes I should propose to run the update in any case ? >>> >>> Is it safe to consider this, I doubt as the changes for example in nat -> >>> snat can't be automated and safe in all kind of configuration people can >>> have. >>> >>> Anyway a loop feedback is welcomed to best serve the product and its >>> packaging. >> >> I guess that behavior could be desirable for point release and mayby for >> minor release. >> >> http://shorewall.org/NewRelease.html >> >> -Matt > > Hi Matt, I personnally not found any trouble with the update procedure > (except > the nat -> snat) changes. Now the quest is are we sure (we as shorewall > dealers ;-) to not break a working system. >
Bruno -- what problem did you have with nat -> snat conversion? Thanks, -Tom -- Tom Eastep \ Q: What do you get when you cross a mobster with Shoreline, \ an international standard? Washington, USA \ A: Someone who makes you an offer you can't http://shorewall.org \ understand \_______________________________________________
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Shorewall-devel mailing list Shorewall-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel
