[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug-inetutils] arp
From: |
Simon Josefsson |
Subject: |
[bug-inetutils] arp |
Date: |
Mon, 03 May 2010 22:48:38 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) |
Folks,
I was thinking about adding an 'arp' tool to our toolbox. Any
objections to including such a tool?
For inspiration, we could base it on an existing implementation, if that
is acceptable? Plenty of code in InetUtils appears to come from BSD
already, judging by the license headers. Running 'diff' on these files
show that they have diverged somewhat:
NetBSD:
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/usr.sbin/arp/arp.c?rev=1.48&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&only_with_tag=MAIN
FreeBSD:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/src/usr.sbin/arp/arp.c?rev=1.71.2.5;content-type=text%2Fplain
OpenBSD:
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/~checkout~/src/usr.sbin/arp/arp.c?rev=1.49;content-type=text%2Fplain
There is also the net-tools implementation, which claims to be under
GPLv2+:
https://cvs.berlios.de/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/net-tools/net-tools/arp.c?revision=1.27&view=markup
This one has the advantage of being the upstream for operating systems
like gNewSense already, so making the switch to inetutils-arp for that
system would be safer.
We could also re-implement it from scratch, although I'm not sure I will
be able to finish that by myself.
I mildly prefer to go the net-tools path. Thoughts?
/Simon
- [bug-inetutils] arp,
Simon Josefsson <=