From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB3478EE2
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 20:28:44 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 87DAA24184
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 20:28:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 20:28:13 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4242944BAF
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 20:28:13 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <49b8fe66-6cd8-b254-053c-4f28c049e529@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 20:28:12 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:107.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/107.0
Content-Language: en-GB
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Leo Nunner <l.nunner@proxmox.com>
References: <20221024100202.44338-1-l.nunner@proxmox.com>
 <20221024100202.44338-2-l.nunner@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20221024100202.44338-2-l.nunner@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: =?UTF-8?Q?0=0A=09?=AWL -0.031 Adjusted
 score from AWL reputation of From: =?UTF-8?Q?address=0A=09?=BAYES_00 -1.9
 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict
 =?UTF-8?Q?Alignment=0A=09?=SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an
 SPF =?UTF-8?Q?Record=0A=09?=SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF
 =?UTF-8?Q?record=0A=09?=URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query
 to URIBL was blocked. See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
 information. [ipset.pm]
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH firewall 1/1] fix #4268: add 'force'
 parameter to delete IPSet with members
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 19:28:44 -0000

Am 24/10/2022 um 12:02 schrieb Leo Nunner:
> Currently, trying to delete a non-empty IPSet will throw an error.
> Manually deleting all members of the set might be a time-consuming
> process, which the force parameter allows to bypass.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Leo Nunner <l.nunner@proxmox.com>
> ---
>  src/PVE/API2/Firewall/IPSet.pm | 7 ++++++-
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
>

applied, thanks!