On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 10:25:27AM +0200, DI Roman Fiedler wrote: > Yes, the -c works for me (also file inclusion with ". $(find_file > params-dns) " is ok). > > Thanks Roberto! > Glad to hear it.
> > PS: Perhaps one of the shorewall developer could correct the usage line > 1280 in > https://shorewall.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/shorewall/trunk/Shorewall-common/shorewall > > to include the -c option, currently > > echo "Usage: $(basename $0) [debug|trace] [nolock] [ -q ] [ -v ] [ > -t ] <command>" > > It seems that this option is applicable to all commands but I'm not sure > about that. > Interesting. I think that you are right. However, I will defer to Tom on this. I am not sure if there is a reason for the usage messages to be specified the way that they are. Tom, if you end up deciding to change this, please let me know and I will make the change in 3.4 and/or 3.2. > Apart from that "shorewall version" does not want to show the version > when /etc/shorewall does not exist, which is a little unexpected. You > have to use > # /sbin/shorewall -c /etc/shorewall/passive version > 3.2.6 > This is corrected in the 3.4 and 4.0 branches. Basically, in shorewall 3.2, the configuration files were identified before the commands were processed. So, it did not matter what command you wanted to run, it would error out if at least a minimal configuration did not exist. Regards, -Roberto P.S. Please don't top post. -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________ Shorewall-users mailing list Shorewall-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users
