> > I wasn't whining - again - how the hell is justifying what I said > > whining? > > You are saying our libpcap is buggy, but you fail to justify > that claim.
No I didn't, I said it was out of date. You want me to justify it? Here. Making all in . /bin/sh ./libtool --mode=link gcc -g -DIPV4_ONLY -O2 -pipe -g -DIPV4_ONLY -O2 -pipe -o nprobe nprobe-nprobe.o libnprobe.la -lresolv -lc -lpthread -lz -lpcap gcc -g -DIPV4_ONLY -O2 -pipe -g -DIPV4_ONLY -O2 -pipe -o .libs/nprobe nprobe-nprobe.o -L./.libs -lnprobe -lresolv -lpthread -lz -lpcap -Wl,-rpath,/usr/local/lib nprobe-nprobe.o(.text+0x153d): In function `usage': /root/nProbe/nprobe.c:921: warning: strcpy() is almost always misused, please use strlcpy() nprobe-nprobe.o(.text+0xa0f): In function `processPacket': /root/nProbe/nprobe.c:449: warning: sprintf() is often misused, please use snprintf() nprobe-nprobe.o(.text+0x4ac8): In function `fetchPackets': /root/nProbe/nprobe.c:2874: undefined reference to `pcap_next_ex' nprobe-nprobe.o(.text+0x4c27):/root/nProbe/nprobe.c:2886: undefined reference to `pcap_next_ex' nprobe-nprobe.o(.text+0x4c96):/root/nProbe/nprobe.c:2901: undefined reference to `pcap_next_ex' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status *** Error code 1 You should know its out of date, it's a fairly well known fact appearently. Please stop accusing me of being a dumbass, when you argue a point without knowing the details of it. > > > > Perhaps I will port it .. And see how many people yell at > > > me for That. > > > > :) > > > > > > We have good reasons not to blindly follow changes in libpcap. > > > > >From what I understand they are security related reasons.. Would > > >anyone > > care to expand a bit on that, so that I may know what to > look for when > > doing so? > > This sums it up: > > http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/openbsd/2004-04/0971.html So.. In his opinion, which wasn't really well justified - the code is full of stuff that makes it compatible, and they add things that, in his opinion, don't belong there? How is that a security issue? Its an opinion. So really, bugs in the code aside.. which are in all code.. There is nothing 'wrong' with it, its just fine to be ported, assuming someone wants to take on the (potentially) massive amount of work to fix the bugs all the time. -D.
