On 2016-05-10 15:38, John Crispin wrote: > > > On 10/05/2016 15:35, Bert Vermeulen wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> The iperf package appears to be unmaintained, the maintainers directing >> people to iperf3 instead (see https://sourceforge.net/projects/iperf/). >> >> There is a fork of the original iperf package that's seeing some >> maintenance, named iperf2: https://sourceforge.net/projects/iperf2/ >> >> However iperf3 is in LEDE as well, and works perfectly fine. It is a >> full code rewrite of iperf, and appears to be (mostly?) cmdline-compatible. >> >> I see no reason to keep both: iperf3 is the better project here. >> >> Does anyone have a compelling reason to keep iperf around? This would >> mean switching to the iperf2 project -- either way the original needs to >> go. >> >> > > > i would vote to drop iperf and ask people to use iperf3 NACK. iperf3 cannot do multi-threading, so it is useless for many performance tests that I do.
- Felix _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
