Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 01:28:18 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net> To: Anton Berezin <tobez@tobez.org> Cc: audit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New option to sysctl(8) Message-ID: <45442.1004484498@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Oct 2001 00:16:37 %2B0100." <20011031001637.C99397@heechee.tobez.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 00:16:37 +0100, Anton Berezin wrote: > This is not a problem as such, but I'd prefer not to do that, actually. > -e does not really modify what sysctl(8) does, it only affects the form > of the output, so in a way, this option is more auxiliary than -N and > -n. Besides, sysctl(8) already has a precedent of silently ignoring > options, namely -a in presense of a variable name. Cool, I withdraw my request then. Actually, now thta you put it that way, I can think of at least one scenario where it's better to just ignore the option -- shell aliases, e.g. alias sysctl='sysctl -e' Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45442.1004484498>