> I think it is a good idea to switch directly to strtobool. But anyway, if you > don't want to respin the patch it is fine as it is.
I didn't know that strtobool() existed ... but now that I do I agree that it would be better to use it here. But ... I'm less comfortable updating the patch to use it. User visible behavior would change (currently just "1" is considered "true", but strtobool would also accept "y" and "Y"). I'd also have to think hard about what to do if strtobool() said the input was not a valid boolean. Thanks for the review. -Tony
