25 Apr
2006
25 Apr
'06
9:12 a.m.
"Alan DeKok" <aland@nitros9.org> writes:
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn_Mork?= <bjorn@mork.no> wrote:
But I found that rlm_attr_filter doesn't do xlat. So I was wondering why? Is a patch welcome, or are there good reasons not to do this?
I don't think there's any good reason for this.
The patch shouldn't be too hard.
How about something like this? It does add a bit of overhead by making an xlatted copy of the complete checklist, but this allows us to _test against_ xlatted values in addition to adding them. Thoughts? Unnecessary to xlat anything but the added attributes? Bjørn