On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 09:24:23 -0500 Alex wrote: AB> Windows XP with service pack 1 includes a production quality version of AB> IPv6. There is IPv6 support before sp1, but it is not considered AB> production quality.
Well, that's a good enough reason not to put it in our binaries. I say we continue to ship w/out, and those needing it can build their own. AB> I can create another Windows binary with IPv6 support and we can post AB> both of them. Any objections to having two Windows binaries? AB> AB> I would also like to have OpenSSL support in the binary as there is a AB> pre-compiled OpenSSL DLL available (so we will not have to include it AB> with our binary). This would mean we would need FOUR binaries.. Well, I was about to respond with an emphatic no, when I realized that we have multiple binaries for Linux, Solaris and HP-UX, to name a few. However, those vary by OS versions, not features. The analogy would be if we had windows binaries for 98, 2k, XP, etc. I think the bottom line will be if you want to spend the time to build them and support them, then go for it. If nothing else, you could build them and we could put them in the 'unsupported' directory on the web site. Any other core devs care to chip in their 2 cents? -- Robert Story; NET-SNMP Junkie Support: <http://www.net-snmp.org/> <irc://irc.freenode.net/#net-snmp> Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=net-snmp-coders> You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different. ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
