> >On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 03:07:14PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> >>>># pas on re0 from any \ #
> >>>># to any port 59 #
> >[...]
> >>> i would think the good reason is that the line is not a comment
> >>> as you imagine, but would effectively turn into:
> >[...]
> >>\<ret> is the only special case that says "ignore both". In any other
> >>case \<c> should translate into just the character <c>.
just occurred to me that maybe i also misunderstood what the OP wanted.
these two seem different:
---
rule with valid \<ret><whitespace><whitespace># here is a comment
syntax for pf # here is another comment
---
as opposed to:
---
rule with valid \<ret><whitespace><whitespace>
syntax for pf
---
eg, maybe the OP was using octothorpes as an ascii box-drawing
char and did not mean to imply that the 'pass on' and 'port 59' lines
both had trailing octothorpes in them in his pf.conf?
( my response was to the first of the two, tho that doesn't mean
i'm any less wrong )
> Matthias Kilian wrote:
> >It's common that anything after an unquoted # up to the newline
> >including backslashed text is ignored, at least in sh(1), awk(1)
> >and friends.
eg ( sed -nel somefile ), :
-( sed -nel somefile )-
pass on \\\r#test\n$
lo all keep state\n$
-----------------------
would turn into:
----
pass on lo all keep state
----
by virtue of the unquoted # up to the newline being ignored,
essentially making:
---
pass on \\\r\n$
lo all keep state\n$
---
be the two components that the parser should have to concatenate?
( i made the '\r' with ^V^M )
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 12:08:52AM +0200, Alexander Hall wrote:
> I agree. Even the sample pf.conf says...
>
> #rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp from <spamd> to port smtp \
> # -> 127.0.0.1 port spamd
>
> ...when it actually _could_ use...
>
> #rdr pass on $ext_if proto tcp from <spamd> to port smtp \
> -> 127.0.0.1 port spamd
that one i think is slightly different than the OP. if
it ignored text from the first '#' up to the newline, that
one would error out too, right ( the '\' meant to escape the
newline would itself be ignored )?
the:
----
# stuff i \
commented out
----
syntax seems intuitive to me, but given that i haven't
written any lexer, i don't have any standing.
--
jared
[ openbsd 3.9-current GENERIC ( may 1 ) // i386 ]
