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

Bug#864313: ITP: ipcalcng -- Tool to assist in network address calculations for IPv4 and IPv6



Hoi Muri,

Debian already has the package 'sipcalc', which can do IP address
'calculations' and also understands IPv6. Did you have a look at that
package and whether it has the features you need? If it does then there
would be no need to package ipcalcng?
*t

Am 06.06.2017 um 21:04 schrieb Muri Nicanor:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Muri Nicanor <muri@immerda.ch>
> 
> * Package name     : ipcalcng
>   Version          : 0.2.0-1
>   Upstream Author  : Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
> * Url              : https://github.com/nmav/ipcalc
> * Licenses         : BSD-3-Clause,GPL-2
>   Programming Lang : C
>   Section          : net
> 
>  This is a modern tool to assist in network address calculations for
>  IPv4 and IPv6. It acts both as a tool to output human readable
>  information about a network or address, as well as a tool suitable to
>  be used by scripts or other programs.
>  .
>  It supports printing a summary about the provided network address,
>  multiple command line options per information to be printed,
>  transparent IPv6 support, and in addition it will use libGeoIP if
>  available to provide geographic information.
> 
> I'm an intense user of ipcalc, which is a really useful tool, but ipcalc
> does not do IPv6 addresses. I've stumbled over the ipcalc by Nikos
> Mavrogiannopoulos when looking for a version that is IPv6 capable. I'm
> aware of the naming collision, thats why i propose to call the package
> (and the binary) ipcalng. I'm not sure yet if that name is the right
> solution, in particular because in fedora the perl ipcalc version was
> renamed to ipcalculator and this one is now called ipcalc [0]. This
> could lead to a lot of confusion and i would have to maintain that
> change forever. If there are better solutions please let me know.
> 
> cheers,
> muri
> 
> [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ipcalculator
> 


Reply to: