On Tue, May 12, 2015 1:41 am, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:34:28AM +0200, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: >> On Tue, 2015-05-12 at 09:04 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> > > While working for an updated ipcalc to support ipv6 transparently, I >> > > figured we have more tools which are not IPv6-ready and awkwardly >> > > provide an additional tool with a -6 suffix, supposedly for separate >> > > IPv6 support. That looks like a relic of the past, we still drag. >> IPv6 >> > > support should be transparent in programs (fortunately we don't have >> > > ssh6). Any objection to fill bugs to merge the following tools with >> > > their ipv4 equivalent? >> > > >> > > ping6, geoiplookup6, tracepath6, traceroute6 >> > >> > While I agree with your assessment of the separate tools, I think >> > you're better off filing bugs with the upstream projects. >> >> I'm interested in what fedora ships rather than the upstream project per >> se. > > Fedora ships whatever upstream ships. Big changes like integrating > separate programs together should be made upstream. > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Staying_close_to_upstream_projects > >> The fedora maintainer may chose to switch to another upstream >> project if that is required. > > Are there other such projects that have all the features of current > ping/traceroute/etc but integrate the tools together? > > Rich. > Probably worth it to add fping/fping6 to the list as well: https://github.com/schweikert/fping -jc -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
