Re: what to do with iputils (ping, etc)
md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Oct 21, Noah Meyerhans <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> > > and build process is a mess. The upstream developer is one of the
>> > > kernel network stack maintainers, and he wants the iputils package to
>> > > always work with the latest and greatest kernel functionality. As a
>> > > result, he includes lots of kernel headers in his programs rather than
>> > > using standard headers from /usr/include.
>> > So what? There is nothing wrong with this.
>> Tell that to the hurd or kFreeBSD people.
> I could not care less about hurd or kFreeBSD, sorry.
> But I care a lot about having a working and up to date iputils package
> for my Linux systems, and I do not want Debian to fork it unless there
> is a very good reason. Supporting a toy unreleased OS is not one.
Folding the headers into the package does not advance this goal, it