[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: what to do with iputils (ping, etc)

On Oct 21, Noah Meyerhans <noahm@debian.org> wrote:

> It depends on what you mean by "up to date".  If we're only including
> glibc headers, then we can only use functionality that glibc supports.
Which I would consider a big problem.

> If we bypass glibc and directly use kernel functionality, then we get
> all the latest and greatest kernel networking features.  However, the
> programs are then entirely linux specific, and may even fail to work
> correctly on different (typically older) version of Linux.
Then the program would be broken and in need to be fixed, but I have no
reason to believe that it actually suffers from this kind of bugs.

> So yes, in some sense, a portable ping may be out of date.  This is
> exactly why the upstream author didn't accept my patches to remove the
> dependency on kernel headers.  He cares more about the package being up
> to date.  Our requirements may be slightly different, though.
Please let me know if you plan to remove features from iputils, so
I will start maintaining a new, fully working package.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: