> 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.
As did, I suspect, some of Alexey's patches; I know somebody filed a bug
against Red Hat 6.1-or-later tcpdump because it no longer defaulted to
promiscuous mode, so those patches certainly broke some habits, and may
well have broken 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.
I tend to agree with Bill on this point - the "you" who would fix the
script probably isn't the "you" who checkes into the tcpdump CVS tree
the change, and
1) people might not be installing tcpdump from source, and, as
such, might not see the ChangeLog - they might just be
installing the next version of some OS, which picked up a later
version of tcpdump;
2) even if they are installing a new version from source, or if
they're installing a new OS release and the change is
mentioned in the release notes, they might miss it
(especially if it's buried in a large release note).
-
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
