On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 10:55:49AM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 01:03:20AM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: > > This reverts commit 9b032cd6477b847f48dc8454f0e73935e9f48754. > > > > While it is true that a cache exists, we still need to capture new sets > > and their elements if they are anonymous. This is because the name > > changes and rules will refer to them by name. Please, tell me how I can reproduce this here with a simple snippet and I will have a look. Thanks! > > Given that there is no easy way to identify the anonymous set in cache > > (kernel doesn't (and shouldn't) dump SET_ID value) to update its name, > > just go with cache updates. Assuming that echo option is typically used > > for single commands, there is not much cache updating happening anyway. > > This was fixing a real bug, if this is breaking anything, then I think > we are not getting to the root cause. > > But reverting it does not make things any better.
