On Wed, 2 May 2001, Bill Fenner wrote: > >See http://www.tcpdump.org/lists/workers/2001/01/msg00146.html > > > >for an old patch to fix SMB printing a bit. It uses vflag > 0 but could > >be changed. I haven't received feedback on this one. If it was polished, > >would it get in? > > I changed it to use vflag > 1 and committed it in February =) > See http://www.tcpdump.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/tcpdump/print-smb.c, > rev 1.10. Ah thanks, I'd missed that :-) > >The same for http://www.tcpdump.org/lists/workers/2001/01/msg00145.html > > I'd almost rather make "-nn" mean 'translate ports but not IP addresses', > and leave "-n" with the old behavior, since I wouldn't be surprised if > there were scripts that depended on the output of tcpdump -n matching > e.g. the perl regexp > /(\d+\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+)\.(\d+) > (\d+\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+)\.(\d+)/ . I find this approach illogical; -vvv means ultra _v_erbose. -nn should mean zero _n_o translation :-). That's the way it was in Alexey's tcpdump patches too, btw. Yeah, that could break some scripts. My personal opinion is that you can't stop the development; if a script does that and you update tcpdump, you should fix the script. If we want to remove some redundant command-line switches (there are a few; I've sent a mail about some of them in Jan/Feb) we should be able to do it with a clear conscience. Just mention it in ChangeLog or the like, and the hands are IMO clean. However, _bigger_ changes might have to wait for the next major release. A matter of taste of course. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords - This is the TCPDUMP workers list. It is archived at http://www.tcpdump.org/lists/workers/index.html To unsubscribe use mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=unsubscribe
