force_check_config - how to use?

Alan DeKok aland at
Thu Jan 20 15:59:09 CET 2011

William Bulley wrote:
> You said yourself to not look at the source code.

  My intent was to say that looking at the source code was confusing
you.  You were looking at *load-time* expansion, which also happens.
You were then confusing it with *run-time* expansion.

>  Patches are unlikely in that atmosphere.

  You are unlikely to solve the problem if you are looking at the wrong
thing.  Was I wrong to tell you that?

>  My point: _syntax_ checking for valid _syntax_ at
> a time _other_ than run time _is_ _possible_ without having to go the
> extra mile of semantic checking, as in, variable expansion.  I am not
> talking about variable expansion, since that is only possible by running
> packets through the server (at run time).

  Sure.  Supply a patch.

> Since I am not allowed to inspect the source code,

  The fact that the source is publicly available from many locations,
*and* the project continually accepts patches shows that this comment is
just you being whingy.

> I would not have been
> able to discover the following comments relevant to this thread:

  And the purpose of quoting those comments is... ?

  Nothing technical, that's for sure.  As a hint: my feelings won't be
hurt if you quote my opinions back to me.  Nice try, though.

> If my employer would permit,

  That's your problem.

> and if you would allow me to look at the source,

  And that's also your problem.  I'm sorry your feelings are hurt.

> I would be happy to supply a patch.

  Ah, yes.  The "I *would* help, but you horrible people have been
*mean* to me" defense.  We've seen that lots, thanks.

>  Neither of these are likely to happen in
> any event.  This thread was created to shed some light on the issue.  I do
> appreciate your comments.  Thanks again.  :-)

  Sure.  Any time.

  Alan DeKok.

More information about the Freeradius-Users mailing list