Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 02:13:33 +0000 (UTC) From: Stef <stef-list@memberwebs.com> To: Harti Brandt <harti@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Shteryana Shopova <shteryana@gmail.com> Subject: Re: bsnmp module for monitoring network flows: bsnmp-pcap Message-ID: <20090121021333.421DE8C2AB9@mx.npubs.com> References: <20090120012053.4D5358C2A76@mx.npubs.com> <61b573980901200200g4ff6ff16r39c2e07c5459406@mail.gmail.com> <20090120134230.U58797@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Harti Brandt wrote: > I probably missed something here. Any other conflicts? Can we move bsnmp-pcap > to 207? And does bsnmp-jails conflict with something? Like Shteryana said, it seems like it does conflict... Would it work to have 1111 and 1112? I used those while the software was in development (blush) and it's deployed as such on a couple dozen production servers I've been running bsnmp-jails and bsnmp-pcap on. If not, then any other two numbers are fine. Once I hear officially, I'll roll new releases. Cheers, Stef Walter
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090121021333.421DE8C2AB9>