Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 20:26:07 +0100 From: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <jruigrok@via-net-works.nl> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, Archie Cobbs <archie@dellroad.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/tcpdump print-smb.c Message-ID: <20010124202607.A1455@lucifer.bart.nl> In-Reply-To: <p05010402b694bfca2ece@[128.113.24.161]>; from drosih@rpi.edu on Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 01:26:52PM -0500 References: <XFMail.010123221817.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <p05010402b694bfca2ece@[128.113.24.161]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-On [20010124 19:30], Garance A Drosihn (drosih@rpi.edu) wrote: >Now, back to this thread. Archie fixed a BUG. A BUG. That >is not a typo on a man page. It is not a spelling correction. >IT IS A BUG. If I am using tcpdump to look at SMB packets, I >would much prefer to SEE THE CORRECT OUTPUT than to worry about >a little cvs bloat. Somehow I am going to regret this, but they say wisdom comes to those who try, fail/succeed and learn from their trying. Apologies to David O`Brien for speaking on his account on some things, but I hope I understood his previous sentiments correctly, if not apologies. The point everybody is failing to see here is not repo bloat. The point is maintainability and having just spend two days just trying to get awk MFC'd correctly I think that both David and my points in time [we've had this discussion before, and so many other discussion as well that I am growing quite weary of them by now] have been on the case of maintainability. Not to belittle anyone, but David and me are currently two of people, out of a score of more, who actively deal a lot with contrib'd sources and their subsequent MFC's, and we can readily attest that taking files of the vendor branch is not making our task that much easier. Sure, there exist tools which make this easier, but cause other problems for our project. To refer to your, in my reading, rather harsh statement above Garance, this bug has been present since the last import of tcpdump in CURRENT, I haven't read a lot, if any, complaints about it. Furthermore CURRENT is already in a great state of flux, one bug more or less in CURRENT does not [yet] hurt us enough to not follow the best of `procedures' dealing with things like this. And another aside, if Archie would've consulted with the other developers or directly with David or me we could've advised him to merely import this as a patch on along on the vendor branch, causing less problems for us all. And yet another, Bill Fenner showed himself to be a good maintainer of tcpdump for FreeBSD, if some people find that hard to believe, please read tcpdump-workers archives. Another point, wrong documentation can be as bad as a bug, please do not discard documentation as being minor in severity of affecting a tool than a bug in the tool itself. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven VIA Net.Works The Netherlands BSD: Technical excellence at its best Network- and systemadministrator D78D D0AD 244D 1D12 C9CA 7152 035C 1138 546A B867 Misery loves company... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010124202607.A1455>