On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 10:04:44PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > A possible solution to this would be to relax the flags check in rcctl, > > so it only cares if there are actual flags supplied. See diff below for > > a suggestion on how to deal with this which seems to work. > > The first half of the patch seems pointless to me. > Why do you want to allow "disable foo flags"? > Or am i overlooking something? >
I agree the first half may be pointless, I was only trying to be symmetrical in the handling of the flags keyword so it works both ways: --- # rcctl enable pf flags # rcctl disable pf flags --- I don't feel strongly about this though, either way is fine for my needs. > > The second half is ok schwarze@ if Antoine wants to commit, > though i'd slightly prefer the simplified version given below. > Looks good to me :). Regards, Patrik Lundin
