On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 04:17:50PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2014/07/24 19:08, Vadim Zhukov wrote: > > I don't see any point in having this port when we already have (better > > documented) nc(1) in base. And this will get rid of conflict with > > net/ucspi-tcp. Nothing depends on net/tcpcat as well. > > OK to zap it, though perhaps it makes sense to add the conflict marker > to ucspi-tcp anyway for people who had the old one installed?
Yep, conflict markers are cheap
