Re: Splitting up snort
On 22 Mar 2001, Itai Zukerman wrote:
>> But consider
>> making it less than a full-on dependency of snort on snort-rules: a
>> suggests would do nicely.
>
>snort-rules would have to depend on a particular version of snort (the
>snort that supported the features used in the rules).
yes, but it is entirely doable to run snort without a ruleset at all, just
entirely dumb. So logically that would mean that snort-rules depends:
snort (version), while snort recommends: or suggests: snort-rules.
Perhaps snort-rules could be a virtual package provided by
snort-rules-policy or snort-rules-ddos ad nauseum.
>-itai
>
--
There is no problem so great that it cannot be solved with suitable
application of High Explosives.
Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who!
Reply to: