[Shorewall-users] shorewall-5.0.15.2: "-n" in output

[Thomas Deutschmann]

Hi,

looks like I missed shorewall-5.0.15.2. Learned about the release from
5.1.0 RC1 announcement. Anyways, is that a bug?

# shorewall safe-restart [...] Reloading Shorewall....
Initializing... Processing /etc/shorewall/init ... Processing
/etc/shorewall/tcclear ... Setting up Route Filtering... Setting up
Martian Logging... Setting up log backend Setting up Proxy ARP...
Preparing iptables-restore input... Running /sbin/iptables-restore
... IPv4 Forwarding Enabled Processing /etc/shorewall/start ...
Processing /etc/shorewall/started ... done. -n Do you want to
accept the new firewall configuration? [y/n]

^^

The "-n" before the question ("Do you want to...") seems to be new.
Not present in 5.0.15.1.


- --
Regards,
Thomas

[Thomas Deutschmann]

Post by Thomas Deutschmann
The "-n" before the question ("Do you want to...") seems to be
new. Not present in 5.0.15.1.

Mh, no. I changed default shell from /bin/bash to /bin/dash on that
system. Only happening when using "/bin/dash" (dash-0.5.9.1).


- --
Regards,
Thomas

[Tom Eastep]

Post by Thomas Deutschmann

Post by Thomas Deutschmann
The "-n" before the question ("Do you want to...") seems to be
new. Not present in 5.0.15.1.

Mh, no. I changed default shell from /bin/bash to /bin/dash on
that system. Only happening when using "/bin/dash" (dash-0.5.9.1).

Doesn't occur with dash 0.5.7-4...

- -Tom


- --
Tom Eastep \ When I die, I want to go like my Grandfather who
Shoreline, \ died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like
Washington, USA \ all of the passengers in his car
http://shorewall.net \________________________________________________

[Thomas Deutschmann]

Post by Tom Eastep
Doesn't occur with dash 0.5.7-4...

Yeah, that's a Gentoo thing :(

There are different opinions in Gentoo whether this change is good or
not, see https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=590696

I don't have an own opinion yet.

But maybe you agree with the argumentation, see

Post by Tom Eastep
there's no requirement for `echo` to support escape sequences.
bash, by default, does not, while dash always does. POSIX permits
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/echo.html
however, since the behavior is not portable, no one should be
relying on echo having any specific behavior. they should use
`printf` when they want an escape sequence. it also makes dash
smaller & faster to disable this logic entirely.

(from
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/tree/app-shells/dash/files/dash-0.5.9.1-dumb-echo.patch?id=5f0b322850dba9944fdb0f15b9e3e1587d38f929#n4)

and want to use "printf" instead.


- --
Regards,
Thomas

[Tom Eastep]

Post by Thomas Deutschmann

Post by Tom Eastep
Doesn't occur with dash 0.5.7-4...

Yeah, that's a Gentoo thing :(
There are different opinions in Gentoo whether this change is good
or not, see https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=590696
I don't have an own opinion yet.
But maybe you agree with the argumentation, see

Post by Tom Eastep
there's no requirement for `echo` to support escape sequences.
bash, by default, does not, while dash always does. POSIX
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/echo.html
however, since the behavior is not portable, no one should be
relying on echo having any specific behavior. they should use
`printf` when they want an escape sequence. it also makes dash
smaller & faster to disable this logic entirely.

(from
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/tree/app-shells/dash/files/dash-0.5.9.1-dumb-echo.patch?id=5f0b322850dba9944fdb0f15b9e3e1587d38f929#n4)
and want to use "printf" instead.

Okay -- to be on the safe side, Shorewall 5.1.0 will eliminate the use
of 'echo' options.

Thanks,
- -Tom
- --
Tom Eastep \ When I die, I want to go like my Grandfather who
Shoreline, \ died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like
Washington, USA \ all of the passengers in his car
http://shorewall.net \________________________________________________