[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <551FEB6C.6040509@mailbox.org>
Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2015 15:47:24 +0200
From: Frank Dittrich <frank.dittrich@...lbox.org>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Problem with john.conf
On 04/04/2015 01:39 PM, magnum wrote:
> http://www.openwall.com/lists/john-users/2015/04/04/1 should be refered
> to as well.
>
> A name of "?List" is not an error, it's just not parsed as a list. Solar
> pointed out an inconsistency we have with .include sections now. Maybe
> the problem is that #1121 made John silently ignore a situation instead
> of bailing out with an error?
Yes, I think a section named "[List.*]" should only be able to include
other sections named "[List.*]", and Sections using other names
shouldn't be allowed to include "[List.*]" sections.
I wouldn't require sections included by a "[List.Rules:*]" section to be
named "[List.Rules:*]".
Frank
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
