Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:59:55 UTC
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=262590 --- Comment #9 from Matteo Riondato <matteo@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Kristof Provost from comment #8) We don't end up with "anchor parent", we end up with "parent", rather than with "parent/*": anchor_call does not include the "anchor " part, as far as I can tell. Why wouldn't "parent" be what we want (notice that if you pass something with '/*" to the next recursive call, you get the error). The stripping of "/*" is exactly what happens also when parsing the command line arguments and one gives "-a parent/*". As for the test scenario, please notice that there is a rule inside child too. If you don't like the rules that are inside parent but not inside child, you can ignore them: the issue still exists. Notice though that there is literally nothing that prevent the situation specified in the test. 'anchor "parent/*"' in pf.conf just means: evaluate all the rules in parent and all the rules in any anchor that is a child of parent, recursively. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.