| 1 |
Norberto Bensa wrote: |
| 2 |
> Steve [Gentoo] wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> Does everyone who has ruledujour execute daily get these faults reported? |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
> Nope. But I've disabled AntiDrug in /etc/rulesdujour/config because for a few |
| 7 |
> days, I was getting a warning about antidrug's maintainer losing it's |
| 8 |
> domain/host/isp or something like that. And BTW: |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
I've followed your lead... much more pleasant. :-) |
| 11 |
>> Lint output: [22610] warn: config: unparseable chars in 'if you are running |
| 12 |
>> SA 3.0.0 or higher, you already have antidrug and this file': '3.0.0' |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
> ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 15 |
> ;-) |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
Yes... but... I'd have hoped that the default configuration would not |
| 18 |
generate errors like this. If the error is caused by my specific |
| 19 |
configuration... then I'd understand that it is all my fault... (as they |
| 20 |
say) - but it seems a bad idea to have a broken rule-set included in the |
| 21 |
defaults... (which, to me, it appears to be.) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Steve |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives