The reason I limited it to just D or x is that without that, r and R files would also be protected and that wouldn't be desired. I can do a check just for those however since unfiltered behavior otherwise makes more sense. <blockquote type="cite">On Apr 27, 2011 12:52 PM, "Lennart Poettering" <<a href="mailto:lennart@poettering.net">lennart@poettering.net</a>> wrote: On Wed, 27.04.11 10:03, William Douglas (<a href="mailto:william.r.douglas@gmail.com">william.r.douglas@gmail.com</a>) wrote: > > +static bool pro...Hmmy, why only protected D and x here? I think it would make sense protect *everything* with a rule of its own. If somebody writes a rule, then it should apply unconditionally, and not be overriden by another rule. So I think this last check should be removed, or do you have a strong reason to limit this to x and D? Especially, since for the aging we did not make such a check, and your patch thus alterns the current behaviour, and I am not sure why? Otherwise looks fine to me. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. </blockquote>