Georger I appreciate the work you have put in, but it's not a 'contribution'
to ntop.  You have certainly highlighted some issues.  But if I were to more
forward with this, all you have done is to make work for me - and in a
platform I don't typically use and thus am not setup to test in.

WRT to patches for ntop, there are two ways you can go about this - 

  Stage One is to do just enough to make ntop work FOR YOU in YOUR specific
environment. That's great, more power to you, but it doesn't help anyone
else.

People publish this type of work in the hope - as you indicated - that
somebody else grabs it and continues forward.

  Stage Two is to then take the next step(s) and to provide usable patches
for baseline ntop.

Through the lists, I'll work with people (who are capable and interested in
doing the work at stage #2).  I'll help point them in the right directions,
tell them 'the ntop way' and provide comments on interim patches, etc.  But
that's about the limit.  

The emphasis of stage #2 is on YOU "doing the work".  I don't typically want
to take somebody's effort and do the rework.  In general, a contribution
that makes more work for me isn't useful (to me).

What I want to do is simply take your patch file, apply it and commit, with
credit to the submitter.  I always run an eye over ANY contribution before I
commit it.  Sometimes if I'm not sure from looking at the code, I'll lightly
test a contributed patch in the environment(s) I do use.  But that's about
it.  

You think you are doing #2, but you really are doing #1.

Your changes work for you and that's great.

My comments assumed you were interested and capable of stage #2.  I'm sorry
only that I misread your interest/capabilities/intentions.  "I'm not a C/C++
coder by trade, I just know enough to fix things I want/need." pretty well
sets the expectations.   Next time I'll ask up front.

WRT: "I'm sure that having ntop run on MingW will attract SKILLED Windows
programmers," that's doubtful.  There have been a few people over the years
with interest in MinGW, but very few and far between.  MinGW does a
creditable job for small codes and for proof-of-concept, but it's not a
production strength tool.  The primary audience is the Unix coder who has to
make 'something' 'work under Windows'.   Most skilled Windows programmers
aren't interested in wasting their time - they would rather be coding real
programs FOR Windows not using a compatibility layer.


-----Burton

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Georger Araujo
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 12:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Ntop-dev] Patches and documentation for building ntop on MingW

Looks like u_int64_t won't be a problem, because it's defined in line 88 of
winpcap-3.1\Include\bittypes.h.
I also accidentally made IPv6 MANDATORY (not my fault
- INET6 is #defined/#undefined in THREE DIFFERENT PLACES), so be sure to
rename config.h.win32 to config.h. It's in the updated documentation anyway,
but it doesn't hurt to remind it here.
To wrap things up, trying to generate arbitraty crashes ntop. I have looked
real hard at this but really have no clue about what's wrong.
Burton, don't get me wrong, but I feel you reply my messagens in a harsh
manner. A REALLY harsh manner.
I'll be more than willing to go away if that's what you want. I'm just
trying to make a contribution here.
Regards,

Georger

--- Georger Araujo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:

> Hi Burton and Jac (and everyone else, let's not exclude anyone :D), 
> files are up at http://savefile.com/projects.php?pid=420840 - REVIEWED 
> patches based on CVS as of today (Aug 29th, checked the module MINUTES 
> ago) and this time with CORRECT docs and Makefile, the much-needed 
> libs (HELL ON EARTH to find and integrate them) - and for the lazy 
> ones a zip file with source and libs ready to compile. Best of all, 
> now IPv6 IS SUPPORTED (much to my surprise, caught a few of these 
> packets in my LAN today)! I suppose this brings ntop Win32 up to par 
> with ntop Linux in terms of features.
> Just to be safe, I have attached the patches to this email as well.
> Burton, I'm not a C/C++ coder by trade, I just know enought to fix 
> things I want/need. I'm sure that having ntop run on MingW will 
> attract SKILLED Windows programmers, and while I recognize my 
> approaches aren't the the prettiest, they work - and I've seen quite a 
> few ugly things while skimming through the code. I I'll have a look at 
> the u_int64_t problem. Regards,
> 
> Georger


        
        
                
_______________________________________________________
Yahoo! Acesso Grátis - Internet rápida e grátis. 
Instale o discador agora! http://br.acesso.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
Ntop-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-dev

_______________________________________________
Ntop-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-dev

Reply via email to