Comments inline...
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 07:33:04AM -0400, Jim Young wrote:
> >>> gharris@xxxxxxxxx 2004-10-20 04:57:02 >>>
> > I'd vote for renaming capinfo to avoid a collision. If we
> > can't come up with a better name than capfileinfo - which
> > I don't really think is a great name, but I'm not sure what
> > would be a better name - let's use that.
>
> How about: "capstat" or "capstats"?
[snip]
> Now what was funny to me was that a google on "capinfo"
> got me to the tcprelay's capinfo link, the tool that prompted
> this rename discussion:
>
> http://tcpreplay.sourceforge.net/capinfo.html
>
> Is it just me or do these tools have similar functionality?
Yes, they have basically the same functionality. Tcpreplay's is limited
to pcap and snoop files though.
> I haven't looked at the tcprelay's capinfo source nor
> the reports it generates (yet) but it smells like they
> both may have diverged from common source?
I took a quick look, and I'd say they were developed independantly. One
would also think that if Ian knew about my capinfo, he wouldn't of used
the same name.
> Even the first line under the man page description's for
> both capinfo's look remarkably similar to me.
>
> Would a (long term) better course of action be for both
> packages, ethereal and tcprelay to use the same
> capinfo tool?
I'm agreable to just about anything honestly. If you guys are going to
be maintaining and improving your capinfo, I prolly would even be
willing to pull mine since Ethereal is more well known and that way I
can worry about other things.
One other funny thing is, I ship "pcapmerge" and Ethereal ships
"mergepcap". Apparently we've had a few common ideas. :)
Aaron, the tcpreplay guy
--
Aaron Turner <aturner at pobox.com|synfin.net> http://synfin.net/
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin
All emails are PGP signed; a lack of a signature indicates a forgery.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
