On Sat, Apr 10, 1999 at 01:56:29PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Redhat 5.9 here, I see the packet loss behavior.
> > Linux version 2.2.5 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version egcs-2.91.66
> > 19990314/Linux (egcs-1.1.2 release)) #2 Mon Mar 29 03:25:09 EST 1999
> > Of course, with all those qualifications I shouldn't wonder why...
> Both Red Hat 5.9 and the latest Debian ship with a buggy "ping" program. This is
> nothing to do with the kernel
Nor is it anything to do with ping per se -- I've tried compiling both
the iputils ping (which RedHat uses, iirc) and the netkit-base ping
(which Debian uses) under my glibc2.1/2.2/Debian unstable machine,
and neither worked.
OTOH, after compiling netkit-base under libc6 (with libc6 and -2.0.36
headers) ping works fine under both libc6/libc6.1 and 2.0/2.2, whereas
compiling it under libc6.1 (with libc6.1 and -2.2.1 headers) ping doesn't
work under libc6.1/2.2.
Since from memory RH5.9 is also glibc2.1 based, I'm guessing that glibc2.1
or 2.2.1's headers don't match real life somewhere. :-/
FWIW, etc.
As far as the Debian bug report goes, if this *really* matters to you,
your best bet is to grab the ping from slink (stable, Debian 2.1), and
do something like:
# dpkg-divert --add --rename /bin/ping
# cp ./ping /bin/ping
# chmod 4755 /bin/ping
and # rm /bin/ping
# dpkg-divert --remove --rename /bin/ping
when this bug gets resolved.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.
``Like the ski resort of girls looking for husbands and husbands looking
for girls, the situation is not as symmetrical as it might seem.''
PGP signature
