Duplicate "object" definition

[Alex Zetaeffesse]

 "You've tested its behavior, and verified how it works.  I'm not sure that
there's much to confirm.
If you think this is a bug, then we're happy to accept a patch which fixes
this.  If this isn't a bug, then the behavior is fine.

I do agree that I'm pushing a bit freeradius, I'm fine with its behaviour,
I just wanted to be sure in case by mistake a define two functions with the
same name (again, I'm speaking about mistakes, that may happen when you
test things).

Thanks Conrad and Alan,

Alex

On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 10:07 AM Alan DeKok <aland at deployingradius.com>
wrote:

> On Nov 3, 2024, at 9:05 PM, Alex Zetaeffesse <fzetafs at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm playing/testing with 3.2.6 to better understand how freeradius
> behaves
> > when finding duplicate definitions.
>
>   I'm not sure why this is important, but OK.
>
> > I created a copy of the filter policy, calling it policy.d/filter2 and I
> > defined the object/policy filter_username in this way:
> > ..
> > Now, when in the directory policy.d I only have the file filter2, I
> always
> > get the expected Access-Reject, if I just have the default file filter I
> > get Access-Accept (the user is correctly configured in the file users).
> > If I have both files (filter and filter 2), when I launch radiusd -X I
> get,
> > the file filter is loaded first and then the file filter2
>
>   Yes.
>
> > How are duplicate objects treated? Is the first definition that's
> retained
> > or the last? From my experiment it seems the first is retained.
> > May you please confirm?
>
>   You've tested it's behavior, and verified how it works.  I'm not sure
> that there's much to confirm.
>
>   If you think this is a bug, then we're happy to accept a patch which
> fixes this.  If this isn't a bug, then the behavior is fine.
>
>   Alan DeKok.
>
> -
> List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See
> http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
>