From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mart Frauenlob Subject: nfct parameters Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 11:31:56 +0200 Message-ID: <5706290C.7080000@chello.at> Reply-To: mart.frauenlob@chello.at Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from vie01a-dmta-at02-1.mx.upcmail.net ([62.179.121.148]:22106 "EHLO vie01a-dmta-at02-1.mx.upcmail.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751397AbcDGJcA (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2016 05:32:00 -0400 Received: from [172.31.216.44] (helo=vie01a-pemc-psmtp-pe02) by vie01a-dmta-pe01.mx.upcmail.net with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ao6I9-0004sv-OZ for netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2016 11:31:57 +0200 Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Good day, while I'm writing bash completion code for conntrack-tools, I browsed through the source and found some things, that raised this questions for me (I'm no C developer, so limited here). 1: Are there three undocumented parameters? namely: disable, default-get, default-set At least there are functions that do something... not sure what exactly w/ the default-* cmds. 2: in src/nfct-extensions/timeout.c there is: static void nfct_cmd_timeout_usage(char *argv[]) { fprintf(stderr, "nfct v%s: Missing command\n" "%s timeout " "[, ...]\n", VERSION, argv[0]); } Where a 'set' command is printed. Which is another discrepancy? If my reading is correct, please take this mail as a bug report. Best regards, Mart