> I assume that by "build shorewall from source", you mean running
> install.sh rather than running the build45 script from the
> shorewall/tools Git repository.
>
> When running install.sh, you can use either relative or absolute path
> names. If either of the settings is a relative pathname, then /usr/ is
> prepended to form an absolute pathname; otherwise the value is used as is.
>   
Generally speaking, I use one method of compiling Shorewall and that is 
to build it using a .spec file. When I got the init.d problem 
(incidentally, that was the first time I tried to compile all shorewall 
packages instead of just the main ones - shorewall & shorewall-core), I 
used to unpack all package sources and run install.sh, mimicking what 
was done in the %build section of the .spec file.

As far as the above goes - I find it confusing. Either use 
$PREFIX/$LIBEXEC (my preferred option - see below) or just $LIBEXEC 
irrespective of $PREFIX. If you have to use LIBEXEC as a name of the 
libexec directory, you might consider renaming this to LIBEXECNAME 
instead - it would be more clear that way.

The reason I prefer $PREFIX/$LIBEXEC (and that is also valid for its 
perl counterpart) is because it would be more consistent and I won't be 
looking in thousand different places to see where shorewall was 
installed. The $PREFIX also has one other important function - it would 
allow me to install shorewall in a "non-trivial" location (not just 
/usr) - it comes handy when you wish to deploy it on embedded systems or 
systems which do not follow FHS.

I am assuming that for the shorewall to function properly, you do not 
rely on the FHS. If you do, then you probable won't need $PREFIX at all 
and you may use "standard" location installation for shorewall, 
irrespective of what was specified. I am still not clear why do you need 
libexec though - why not use $PREFIX/sbin or $PREFIX/bin for example?

> Given that the scripts are changing so much for 4.5.1, it would probably
> be a good time to drop that compatibility, alright.
>   
The ideal time for introducing major changes (and drop 
backward-compatibilities dragging you down) was with 4.5.0, but I guess, 
better late than never, eh? You may also wish to drop the "blacklist" as 
well in favour of the blrules file.

On an unrelated note - I keep getting the following 3 types of warnings:

1. WARNING: Option EXPORTPARAMS=Yes is deprecated (what is the 
equivalent of this?)

2. WARNING: Shorewall no longer uses broadcast addresses in rule 
generation when Address Type Match is available
I have this in my interfaces file:
   local    usb0        192.168.0.255    
tcpflags,logmartians,nosmurfs,optional

the usb0 is used to connect/debug my android device.

3. ipset WARNINGS:
shorewall[1439]: Compiling /etc/shorewall/blrules...
shorewall[1439]:    WARNING: Ipset AAA does not exist
[...ad nauseum...]
shorewall[1439]:    WARNING: Ipset XXX does not exist
shorewall[1439]: Compiling /etc/shorewall/rules...
shorewall[1439]:    WARNING: Ipset YYY does not exist
[...ad nauseum...]
shorewall[1439]:    WARNING: Ipset ZZZ does not exist

Now, I remember asking you to put these warnings a few mohts back, but 
what I did not account for was that shorewall will be screaming at me 
with these before executing "init" where these sets are loaded. Is there 
any way to rectify this?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel

Reply via email to