From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: Automatically load modules in iptables-save Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:05:54 +0100 Message-ID: <49C24332.2020107@trash.net> References: <20090316171014.GG31952@ralph.linux2go.dk> <20090319125532.GC20472@ralph.linux2go.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Soren Hansen Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:34998 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752461AbZCSNF5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:05:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090319125532.GC20472@ralph.linux2go.dk> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Soren Hansen wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 06:10:14PM +0100, Soren Hansen wrote: >> Resubmitting as per >> http://marc.info/?l=netfilter-devel&m=123722008913373&w=2 >> >> If the iptables modules are not loaded when iptables-save is run, >> iptables-save will fail, because it can't open the relevant files in >> /proc. This patch makes iptables-save attempt to load the modules, and >> then retries. > > Is this the correct list for this? It is. The patch seems rather pointless though, if the module isn't loaded, there's obviously nothing to save. > If the iptables modules are not loaded when iptables-save is run, > iptables-save will fail What does "fail" mean in this context?