From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH]: fix all iptables problems with '!' (hopefully) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 19:53:31 +0100 Sender: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <3E1B222B.5030009@trash.net> References: <35565.195.97.5.193.1041816667.squirrel@fs.tsaousis.gr> <20030106020219.GC423@comet.rv-int> <3E193B0E.9030602@trash.net> <36373.195.97.5.193.1041856153.squirrel@fs.tsaousis.gr> <3E19A1D8.7080605@trash.net> <20030107171526.GL1353@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Netfilter Development Mailinglist Return-path: To: Harald Welte In-Reply-To: <20030107171526.GL1353@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> Errors-To: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Harald Welte wrote: >On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 04:33:44PM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > > >>In fact ! is used in many matches in a non-boolean context. >>After the patch is applied, both it always possible >>(! --uid-owner xxx / --uid-owner ! xxx). >>It would still be nice to have the helptexts unified concerning >>the use of '!', i think. >> >> > >This is why I'm still unsure whether to apply your patch or not. > >I'd rather like to enforce one unique syntax than offering two different >options giving the same result (and possibly causing confusion with the >user). > > Thats the reason why i was unsure weather to send the patch or not ;) What about if i convert all matches to only show "!" in boolean context in the helptexts and change check_inverse and what else might be neccessary to enforce this ? What about backward-compatibility ? Regards, Patrick