|
From: | Bas van der Vlies |
Subject: | Re: [Cfengine] Re: cfexecd mail |
Date: | Wed, 30 Jul 2003 14:12:19 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 |
Mark.Burgess@iu.hio.no wrote:
As long as it's rational and nothing breaks, by all means. M On 30 Jul, Andrew Stribblehill wrote:Quoting Bas van der Vlies <basv@sara.nl> (2003-07-30 11:06:05 BST):Andrew Stribblehill wrote:Quoting Bas van der Vlies <basv@sara.nl> (2003-07-30 10:34:53 BST):Should we not use the same syntax for turning on/off actions cfagent -z sysadm, smptfrom, .... It is easier to understand which variables we ask and we get back. For me it make sense and there is a mechanism to query the cfagent variables.Yes, that's nicer, I agree. Currently we use ':' as the standard separator don't we? So would 'cfagent -z foo:bar:baz -z quux -zbongo' be okay (as a bizarre way) to ask for foo, bar, baz, quux and bongo?No the separator is ','. From the docs cfagent -j copy,tidy ;-) cfagent -x boo,bar,baz -z quux -zbongo is one bizarre way to ask for some variables.Yes, you're right. Even the code agrees with you ;) So Mark, want me to code this?
It is fine for me and the syntax is also clear. In the meanwhile i use my patch that fixes the smtpfrom line and wait for the new cfagent -z. Andrew if you need help with programming or testing. Do not hesitate to ask! -- -- ******************************************************************** * * * Bas van der Vlies e-mail: basv@sara.nl * * SARA - Academic Computing Services phone: +31 20 592 8012 * * Kruislaan 415 fax: +31 20 6683167 * * 1098 SJ Amsterdam * * * ********************************************************************
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |