On 8/20/05, Bruce Dubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, I know. I guess my point was that this is old code and will not > compile as is. We don't know what other improvements have been made to > the program by other maintiners. My initial reaction is that it is not > really a viable candidate for LFS. > > It would be easier to use the inetutils and compile only the ping > program there.
I agree. My link to the original ping was meant to indicate that we do have alternatives, whether they are viable or not is for the editors to decide. BTW, if there are no plans to remove inetutils, we might was well keep the utils such as ftp and telnet that it current installs. -- Tushar Teredesai mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
