[cvs] bogofilter/src bogoconfig.c,1.136,1.137 configfile.c,1.33,1.34 configfile.h,1.10,1.11
David Relson
relson at osagesoftware.com
Mon Jan 19 16:08:14 CET 2004
- Previous message (by thread): [cvs] bogofilter/src bogoconfig.c,1.136,1.137 configfile.c,1.33,1.34 configfile.h,1.10,1.11
- Next message (by thread): [cvs] bogofilter/src bogoconfig.c,1.136,1.137 configfile.c,1.33,1.34 configfile.h,1.10,1.11
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 16:03:03 +0100
Matthias Andree <matthias.andree at gmx.de> wrote:
> Stefan Bellon <sbellon at sbellon.de> writes:
>
> >> We'll tie command line options to configuration file options. I
> >wonder> if that's desirable. Some options make sense on the command
> >line only> (such as the configuration file name). We're exposing all
> >with that> single-option approach.
> >
> > Wasn't it you who wrote two days ago:
> >
> >> A universal option that allows us to pass any configuration file
> >> parameter on the command line might solve that problem for good.
>
> Right, but does that mean we make command line and configuration file
> absolutely identical? Some options don't make sense in configuration
> files.
No. It means that any config file option can be put on the command
line. If we're going to allow _any_ of the config file options on the
command line, we might as well allow them all. The command line will
still have its single character switches.
- Previous message (by thread): [cvs] bogofilter/src bogoconfig.c,1.136,1.137 configfile.c,1.33,1.34 configfile.h,1.10,1.11
- Next message (by thread): [cvs] bogofilter/src bogoconfig.c,1.136,1.137 configfile.c,1.33,1.34 configfile.h,1.10,1.11
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
More information about the bogofilter-dev
mailing list