On Friday 2011-12-02 02:29, Tim Gardner wrote:
>@@ -34,6 +36,8 @@ static const struct xt_option_entry recent_opts[] = {
> .excl = F_ANY_OP, .flags = XTOPT_INVERT},
> {.name = "seconds", .id = O_SECONDS, .type = XTTYPE_UINT32,
> .flags = XTOPT_PUT, XTOPT_POINTER(s, seconds)},
>+ {.name = "reap", .id = O_REAP, .type = XTTYPE_NONE,
>+ .also = F_SECONDS },
> {.name = "hitcount", .id = O_HITCOUNT, .type = XTTYPE_UINT32,
> .flags = XTOPT_PUT, XTOPT_POINTER(s, hit_count)},
> {.name = "rttl", .id = O_RTTL, .type = XTTYPE_NONE,
>+
>+ if ((info->check_set & XT_RECENT_REAP) && !info->seconds)
>+ xtables_error(PARAMETER_PROBLEM,
>+ "recent: you must specify `--seconds' with `--reap'");
> }
Well, I did mean that .also = F_SECONDS makes the extra
"info->check_set & XT_RECENT_REAP) && !info->seconds" test
redundant. Or, the error message is wrong, because you are
actually testing for seconds==0 rather than "reap was specified
without seconds".
Is seconds=0 even useful for non-reap cases?
If not, we should probably consider using .min=1 on the --seconds
parameter, in which case the test is also redundant.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
