Hi, Playing a bit with the INCLUDE (and ?INCLUDE) directive I don't get exactly what I wish and from what I see, I think this is not yet possible.
I would like to make Shorewall configuration highly modular for the "rules" part by being able to disable/enable parts of it. For example, I have rules that span accross different sections and I currently can't include them properly if I'm not mistaken. I have to split the rules according to their section and include them individually which is far from convenient. Would it be possible to extend the functionality of ?INCLUDE (or create another directive if it's necessary, that's up to you) in order to have real splitted "rules" files? rules.foo ------8<----- CUT HERE ------>8------ ?SECTION INVALID ... stuff ... ?SECTION NEW ... stuff ... ------8<----- CUT HERE ------>8------ rules.bar ------8<----- CUT HERE ------>8------ ?SECTION RELATED ... stuff ... ?SECTION NEW ... stuff ... ------8<----- CUT HERE ------>8------ and finaly, "rules" ------8<----- CUT HERE ------>8------ ?INCLUDE rules.foo ?INCLUDE rules.bar ------8<----- CUT HERE ------>8------ or ------8<----- CUT HERE ------>8------ ?INCLUDE rules.foo ?SECTION NEW ... stuff ... ?INCLUDE rules.bar ------8<----- CUT HERE ------>8------ and the compiler would happilly merge all those configurations in order of appearence. Very convenient to simply disable a configuration without trouble. What do you think? -- ObNox
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Shorewall-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users
