All'incirca Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:22:59 +0200, Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de> sembrerebbe aver scritto: > Hi, > * Kartik Mistry <kartik.mistry@gmail.com> [2007-07-22 18:17]: > > On 7/22/07, Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de> wrote: > > >> >> throttle - A bandwidth limiting pipe > [...] > > As I said, throttle is too simple with 3 or 4 command line options > > written in mind with simple use. While, cstream has lots of options > > available to configure your need. > > Did you look at trickle? But trickle is different. Trickle is useful to limiting the bandwidth of a socket, throttle is for limiting the bandwidth of a standard stream. They're two different uses. I reply to this old thread because I too began to work on throttle, and asked for RFS some days ago. I didn't remember this thread and the ITP bug didn't report anything about it. Paul Wise then recalled it to me. Now the question is: cstream is more complex and trickle is different. I don't know of any similar programs. Should I continue on packaging and maintaining throttle (and waiting for someone to sponsor it), or should I ask Joey Hess to include it in moreutils (as Paul Wise suggested), or should I give up with throttle (writing in the ITP bug why did I do so)? Thank you, Giovanni. -- Giovanni Mascellani <g.mascellani@gmail.com> Pisa, Italy Web: http://giomasce.altervista.org SIP: g.mascellani@ekiga.net Jabber: g.mascellani@jabber.org / giovanni@elabor.homelinux.org GPG: 0x5F1FBF70 (FP: 1EB6 3D43 E201 4DDF 67BD 003F FCB0 BB5C 5F1F BF70)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature