On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 04:40:43AM -0400, Simon Law wrote: > > I grant you that, this piece of software is a young 'un; > although I'm surprised that this didn't come up any sooner. (Lucky us.) > > I don't think either library has more than one piece of software > that currently requires it; but this could change for libdnet.sf.net in > the future, seeing as there is activity on the nmap mailing lists. > Since you've had the name for such a long time, I'd like to defer > judgement to you. What do you think is a reasonable way to handle this? > Rename one of the libraries and tweak code that depends on it? Rename > one of the libraries and make them both conflict with each other? > Provide libdnet.sf.net in fragroute and link statically?
As the man page at http://libdnet.sourceforge.net/dnet.3.txt refers to the library as "dnet - dumb networking library" how about renaming it libdumbnet? :-) patrick
