[OISF/outreachy] Working on Bug #2893

[Shivani Bhardwaj]

On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 11:02 PM Vrinda Narayan <vrinda18120 at iiitd.ac.in> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:39 PM Shivani Bhardwaj
> <sbhardwaj at openinfosecfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 6:07 PM Vrinda Narayan via Outreachy
> > <outreachy at lists.openinfosecfoundation.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > I would like to work on this Redmine Issue, Bug #2893. Can I work on this if the issue is still open?
> > Please go ahead.
> >
> > > Also, could someone guide me on where to start?
> > >
> > I think first step would be to try and reproduce it. Maybe then things
> > would get cleared up for you?
> >
> > suricata-update -v
> >
> > should not ideally load any *deleted.rules
>
> If the --no-ignore argument is given still any *deleted.rules should
> not be loaded?
>

Let's go via the definition.

--no-ignore           Disables the ignore option.

and ignore option's default value is to ignore all the *deleted.rules.
Keep in mind here we have default values for any params because they
are necessary. In this case, if "ignore" is not explicitly defined as
a command line param or in the configuration, the default action for
"ignore" should be to ignore all *deleted.rules.

Now, "no-ignore" disables "ignore" option altogether so IMO, it should
not take into account any of the default or defined actions for
"ignore".

Jason, could you please verify if the above deduction is correct?

> >
> > > Regards,
> > > Vrinda Narayan
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Outreachy mailing list
> > > Outreachy at lists.openinfosecfoundation.org
> > > https://lists.openinfosecfoundation.org/listinfo/outreachy
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Shivani
>
>
>
> --
> Vrinda Narayan



-- 
Shivani