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.