<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - "nft -s list ruleset" should include "flush ruleset" as first line"
href="https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1696#c8">Comment # 8</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - "nft -s list ruleset" should include "flush ruleset" as first line"
href="https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1696">bug 1696</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:apachez@gmail.com" title="Apachez <apachez@gmail.com>"> <span class="fn">Apachez</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre><span class="quote">> We could ship an nft-save shell script:
>
> | #!/bin/sh
> |
> | echo "flush ruleset"
> | exec nft "$@" list ruleset
>
> What would a "restore option" do from your perspective?</span >
To me a "restore option" would do the same as -f but with the addition that it
would append "flush ruleset" if that doesnt already exists as the first line in
the file thats being read as input (I guess it could do this blindly because it
wouldnt matter if the file already had one "flush ruleset" so the result is two
"flush ruleset" after each other?).
This way it doesnt matter if the file you restore from have that "flush
ruleset" as first line or not.
That is restore from these two outputs would work equally well:
# nft -s list ruleset > /path/backup1.nft
# nft save ruleset /path/backup2.nft
# nft restore /path/backup1.nft
# nft restore /path/backup2.nft</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are watching all bug changes.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>