On Sun, 2011-03-27 at 13:04 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 27. März 2011, um 12:22:15 schrieb davidMbrooke:
> > On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 14:08 +0100, Tom Erjavec wrote:
> > > Hello Team,
> > >
> > > I am now able to reproduce my problems with yate / shorewall that I
> > > raised 10 days ago. The changes I did to shorewall policy file or rules
> > > file were not reflected if I restarted shorewall. It was the same result
> > > when restarting in either web interface or CLI. The policy and the rules
> > > seem not to be re-compiled during a shorewall web restart or
> > > # /etc/init.d/shorewall restart .
> > >
> > > However, if I stop shorewall and start it again, then the re-compilation
> > > is always done and the changes are reflected.
> > > I suppose that a restart should re-compile as well.
> > >
> > > I hope this description can be understood and helpful.
> > >
> > > Tom
> >
> > Tom and I have been having an off-list email exchange about this.
> > The problem is as follows:
> >
> > /sbin/shorewall restart works fine
> > /etc/init.d/shorewall restart does *not* pick up new rules
> >
> > The code in /etc/init.d/shorewall says:
> >
> > # restart the firewall
> > shorewall_restart () {
> > echo -n "Restarting \"Shorewall firewall\": "
> > $SRWL $OPTIONS restart 2>&1 && echo "done."
> > return 0
> >
> > The problem is the value of $OPTIONS which is set to "-f"
> > in /etc/default/shorewall and the Shorewall docs say:
> >
> > The -f option suppresses the compilation step and simply reused the
> > compiled script which last started/restarted Shorewall.
> >
> > IMHO this is not right, and Tom points out that it is different from
> > Bering-uClibc 3.x.
> >
> > Should we just remove the value for $OPTIONS in /etc/default/shorewall
> > by setting it to an empty string? Expert users could still set it back
> > to "-f" if required. I am happy to make that change if nobody objects.
> >
>
> davidMbrooke;
>
> Looks that I haven't read the docs carefully.
>
> Why not setting it to "-q"?
>
> kp
Setting it to "-q" is OK by me, although the more verbose output is
slightly comforting IMHO.
dMb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
------------------------------------------------------------------------
leaf-user mailing list: leaf-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Support Request -- http://leaf-project.org/
