aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/changes/bug6507
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
* Reject attempts to say FooPort and FooPort 0 in the same cfg domainNick Mathewson2012-08-09
|
* Don't infer we have a FooPort from the presence of a FooPort lineNick Mathewson2012-08-09
Thanks to the changes we started making with SocksPort and friends in 0.2.3.3-alpha, any of our code that did "if (options->Sockport)" became wrong, since "SocksPort 0" would make that test true whereas using the default SocksPort value would make it false. (We didn't actually do "if (options->SockPort)" but we did have tests for TransPort. When we moved DirPort, ORPort, and ControlPort over to the same system in 0.2.3.9-alpha, the problem got worse, since our code is littered with checks for DirPort and ORPort as booleans. This code renames the current linelist-based FooPort options to FooPort_lines, and adds new FooPort_set options which get set at parse-and-validate time on the or_options_t. FooPort_set is true iff we will actually try to open a listener of the given type. (I renamed the FooPort options rather than leave them alone so that every previous user of a FooPort would need to get inspected, and so that any new code that forgetfully uses FooPort will need fail to compile.) Fix for bug 6507.