[Aide] Config syntax misunderstanding

[Richard van den Berg]

freeslkr wrote:
> Hmmm ... I had thought that the = rule was supposed to stop aide from
> recursively adding subnodes. So, is the rule "=/etc/cups  L-n"
> equivalent to "/etc/cups$  L-n"?

Oops. It should be, but it is not the same at this moment.

=/etc/cups L-n

Will not recurse, while

/etc/cups$ L-n

Will recurse for --check but not for --init. I've found the problem for 
this in the code, but I am not sure what I will break by fixing this 
issue. For now, using equal rules is the way to go.

> Is anyone else seeing this behavior? 

Yes, I can confirm this.

Sincerely,

Richard van den Berg