]] Steve Langasek
> My complaint is that this is excessively ugly. For persistent variable data
> that needs to be available during early boot, even when this is binary data
> that the user won't edit, /etc is the normal place to keep it - it's the
> creation of a a .cache subdirectory that I ob
On May 11, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> > Wrong: since you have to copy the whole file to override it, and files
> > in /lib have no conffiles handling, after an upgrade you will not know
> > what was changed by you and what was changed upstream.
> I think everyone here agrees with that. The interest
On Thu, 10 May 2012 21:30:56 +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On May 10, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> >
> > > Agree. Copying a large set of default policies into /etc just because
> > > they *can* be overridden is not user friendly. And it does not make the
> > > defaults any more co
On 05/11/2012 12:53 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> The reason why most old applications do not follow that approach (at
> least not yet) is pretty obvious: their authors never considered it.
> etc-overrides-lib semantics have only become a seriously considered
> alternative fairly recently.
>
No.
The
On 05/11/2012 04:04 AM, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 02:44:45AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
>> On 05/10/2012 04:52 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>
>>> No, really - please *do* do this. The fact that a lot of the software
>>> coming out of RedHat development seems to be d
On 05/11/2012 04:21 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Advantages I mentioned earlier would still be there:
> It's easier to see what is local non-default configuration. Original
> default file is always available in a known location (and very easy to
> revert to, temporarily for testing or permanently).
As
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 05/11/2012 12:53 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
>> The reason why most old applications do not follow that approach (at
>> least not yet) is pretty obvious: their authors never considered it.
>> etc-overrides-lib semantics have only become a seriously considered
>> alternative
Tollef Fog Heen writes:
> ]] Uoti Urpala
>
> Hi,
>
>> Wrong: as mentioned in this thread before, one of the advantages of the
>> etc-overrides-lib model is the option of having a file in /etc that
>> first includes the one in /lib, then overrides just one particular
>> value. This allows handlin
Philip Hands writes:
> On Thu, 10 May 2012 21:30:56 +0300, Uoti Urpala
> wrote:
>> Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> > On May 10, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> >
>> > > Agree. Copying a large set of default policies into /etc just because
>> > > they *can* be overridden is not user friendly. And it does not ma
]] Gergely Nagy
> Tollef Fog Heen writes:
>
> > ]] Uoti Urpala
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >> Wrong: as mentioned in this thread before, one of the advantages of the
> >> etc-overrides-lib model is the option of having a file in /etc that
> >> first includes the one in /lib, then overrides just one part
Thomas Goirand writes:
> From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Configuration_file
>
> "In computing, configuration files, or config files configure the initial
> settings for some computer programs. They are used for user applications,
> server processes and operating system settings."
>
> The fact
On May 11, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> And in etc-overrides-lib, config files still remain in /etc. Its just
> the defaults that live elsewhere. That the defaults are files, and are
> under /lib, is an implementation detail, similarly how gconf defaults
> live under /usr/share/gconf/defaults.
This is n
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:52:25AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote:
Neither the FHS, nor the policy says anything about etc-overrides-lib as
far as I can see. Neither pro or con. Do feel free to point me to the
relevant section, would I be mistaken.
To be honest, I still don’t really understand what
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 11:25:10AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote:
Are you happy with dropping a snippet into a conf.d/ directory, and your
software breaking on an upgrade without notice? Because that can happen
even now, with software that uses only /etc, and /etc alone for their
configuration, witho
Tollef Fog Heen writes:
> ]] Gergely Nagy
>
>> Tollef Fog Heen writes:
>>
>> > ]] Uoti Urpala
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> >> Wrong: as mentioned in this thread before, one of the advantages of the
>> >> etc-overrides-lib model is the option of having a file in /etc that
>> >> first includes the one
On 11/05/2012 08:47, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> OoO Pendant le journal télévisé du jeudi 10 mai 2012, vers 20:29,
> Jean-Christophe Dubacq disait :
>
>> I do not know about trivially merging changes in the etc-overrides-lib
>> model, but in the current model, I am presented with the dpkg prom
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:07:55PM +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
BTW, for standard workstations, there is less and less need to change
things in /etc. My current quota is 1346 files in /etc for about 30 of
them with local changes. This is quite a bad signal/noise ratio.
Well, a standard
Stephan Seitz writes:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 11:25:10AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote:
>>Are you happy with dropping a snippet into a conf.d/ directory, and your
>>software breaking on an upgrade without notice? Because that can happen
>>even now, with software that uses only /etc, and /etc alone
Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
>
>If dpkg kept a copy of the original configuration file (to be retrieved
>at all times), it would be easier to spot local changes.
>I use etckeeper to do that, but it's a bit tiresome to isolate all local
>changes (I have to save the diffs somewhere) (and a lost hope
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On May 11, Gergely Nagy wrote:
>
>> And in etc-overrides-lib, config files still remain in /etc. Its just
>> the defaults that live elsewhere. That the defaults are files, and are
>> under /lib, is an implementation detail, similarly how gconf defaults
>> li
Stephan Seitz writes:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:52:25AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote:
>>Neither the FHS, nor the policy says anything about etc-overrides-lib as
>>far as I can see. Neither pro or con. Do feel free to point me to the
>>relevant section, would I be mistaken.
>
> To be honest, I sti
On 05/11/2012 04:52 PM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Neither the FHS, nor the policy says anything about etc-overrides-lib as
> far as I can see. Neither pro or con. Do feel free to point me to the
> relevant section, would I be mistaken.
>
Section 10.7.2 of dpm:
"Any configuration files created or u
On 05/11/2012 05:25 PM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> And in etc-overrides-lib, config files still remain in /etc.
No.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4facf398
On 05/11/2012 06:39 PM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
>In other words, it does *exactly* the same thing systemd is
>criticised for.
>
Which doesn't mean that it's a good practice.
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble
On 05/11/2012 06:39 PM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Long story short, I still don't see what the fuss is about.
>
The fuss is about we're being told that there will be silent
overwriting of configuration files without being prompted about
changes, which potentially, will make it horrible to manage
upg
Steve McIntyre writes:
> Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
>>
>>If dpkg kept a copy of the original configuration file (to be retrieved
>>at all times), it would be easier to spot local changes.
>>I use etckeeper to do that, but it's a bit tiresome to isolate all local
>>changes (I have to save the d
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 05/11/2012 04:52 PM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
>> Neither the FHS, nor the policy says anything about etc-overrides-lib as
>> far as I can see. Neither pro or con. Do feel free to point me to the
>> relevant section, would I be mistaken.
>>
>
> Section 10.7.2 of dpm:
>
>
Hi all,
There is no any reply in debian-mentors mailing list, so I am forwarding my
message here. Please Cc me in replies, I am not subscribed to debian-devel.
begin original message
2012-05-10 21:08, Boris Pek wrote:
Hi everyone,
I have strange problem with my package eiskalt
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 05/11/2012 06:39 PM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
>>In other words, it does *exactly* the same thing systemd is
>>criticised for.
>>
>
> Which doesn't mean that it's a good practice.
Tell me what you would gain, if there were no files under /lib/systemd,
and all of
Philip Hands wrote:
> The traditional Debian approach to /etc is largely self documenting, to
> the extent that one can generally walk into a site cold and (having
> established that they have decent backups) cheerfully do an upgrade on
> their Debian servers without anything breaking (I do this re
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 04:39:22PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
[snip]
>
> From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Configuration_file
>
> "In computing, configuration files, or config files configure the initial
> settings for some computer programs. They are used for user applications,
> server proce
On May 11, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Long story short, I still don't see what the fuss is about.
Apparently the reason is that you do not understand the problem, since
you keep getting back to the not relevant issue of software which
supports placing configuration directives in multiple directories
On May 11, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > Long story short, I still don't see what the fuss is about.
> The fuss is about we're being told that there will be silent
> overwriting of configuration files without being prompted about
> changes, which potentially, will make it horrible to manage
> upgrade
]] Thomas Goirand
> On 05/11/2012 06:39 PM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> > Long story short, I still don't see what the fuss is about.
> >
> The fuss is about we're being told that there will be silent
> overwriting of configuration files without being prompted about
> changes, which potentially, wil
Am 11.05.2012 14:30, schrieb Marco d'Itri:
> The problem with etc-overrides-lib is that a file must be copied in
> full from /lib to /etc to be modified, and then future changes to the
> same file in /lib will be ignored (so maybe the package will break
> because these changes are required, etc)
Package: wnpp
Owner: Hendrik Tews
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: prooftree
Version : 0.9
Upstream Author : Hendrik Tews
* URL or Web page : http://askra.de/software/prooftree/
* License : GPL-3
Description : proof tree visualization for Proof General
Prooftree
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 11:53:34AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> >
> >If dpkg kept a copy of the original configuration file (to be retrieved
> >at all times), it would be easier to spot local changes.
> >I use etckeeper to do that, but it's a bit tiresome to isolat
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 05/11/2012 06:39 PM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
>> Long story short, I still don't see what the fuss is about.
>>
> The fuss is about we're being told that there will be silent
> overwriting of configuration files without being prompted about
> changes, which potentially,
Am 11.05.2012 14:30, schrieb Marco d'Itri:
> The problem with etc-overrides-lib is that a file must be copied in
> full from /lib to /etc to be modified, and then future changes to the
> same file in /lib will be ignored (so maybe the package will break
> because these changes are required, etc)
I think it would be nice if power saving options (SATA,USB,wireless
etc.) were turned on by default when running on laptop.
Powertop can report which kernel tunables are set (and you can use it to
turn individual options on/off).
Laptop task installs pm-utils by default.
There is also optional lapt
]] Gergely Nagy
> Tollef Fog Heen writes:
>
> > ]] Gergely Nagy
> >> In that case, the including file can be changed (by the admin) to be a
> >> separate file, that does not include, and get the usual conffile
> >> conflict dpkg prompt.
> >
> > How would that work?
> >
> > I have /lib/systemd
On May 11, Michael Biebl wrote:
> You can either copy the file or use the .include directive (which was
> already mentioned) and only override the settings you need.
Not with udev or kmod.
> > The problem with etc-overrides-lib is that a file must be copied in
> > full from /lib to /etc to be m
On 05/11/2012 08:30 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On May 11, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
>
>>> Long story short, I still don't see what the fuss is about.
>>>
>> The fuss is about we're being told that there will be silent
>> overwriting of configuration files without being prompted about
>> cha
On 05/11/2012 08:33 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 11.05.2012 14:30, schrieb Marco d'Itri:
>
>> The problem with etc-overrides-lib is that a file must be copied in
>> full from /lib to /etc to be modified, and then future changes to the
>> same file in /lib will be ignored (so maybe the package
On 05/11/2012 08:28 PM, David Weinehall wrote:
> Talking about yourself in pluralis majestatis now?
> Yes, I get it that you are. Or are you somehow assuming that you can
> speak for all of Debian? I guess you're aware of the fact that I'm a DD
> too?
>
By reading other replies, I thought ther
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "B. Clausius"
* Package name: gedit-projects
Version : 1.1
Upstream Author : B. Clausius
* URL : https://launchpad.net/gedit-projects
* License : GPL-3+
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Manage projects in g
On 05/11/2012 07:04 PM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Steve McIntyre writes:
>
>
>> Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
>>
>>> If dpkg kept a copy of the original configuration file (to be retrieved
>>> at all times), it would be easier to spot local changes.
>>> I use etckeeper to do that, but it's a b
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "B. Clausius"
* Package name: gedit-classbrowser3g
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : B. Clausius
* URL : https://launchpad.net/gedit-classbrowser3g
* License : GPL-3+
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Class Br
On 11.05.2012 14:59, Touko Korpela wrote:
> I think it would be nice if power saving options (SATA,USB,wireless
> etc.) were turned on by default when running on laptop.
> Powertop can report which kernel tunables are set (and you can use it to
> turn individual options on/off).
> Laptop task insta
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On May 11, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>
>> > Wrong: since you have to copy the whole file to override it, and files
>> > in /lib have no conffiles handling, after an upgrade you will not know
>> > what was changed by you and what was changed upstream.
>> I think
On Friday 11 May 2012 06:29 PM, Touko Korpela wrote:
> I think it would be nice if power saving options (SATA,USB,wireless
> etc.) were turned on by default when running on laptop.
> Powertop can report which kernel tunables are set (and you can use it to
> turn individual options on/off).
> Laptop
* Thomas Goirand [120511 04:45]:
> On 05/11/2012 04:04 AM, David Weinehall wrote:
> From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Configuration_file
>
> "In computing, configuration files, or config files configure the initial
> settings for some computer programs. They are used for user applications,
> ser
Package: wnpp
Owner: Youhei SASAKI
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: rake-compiler
Version : 0.8.1
Upstream Author : Luis Lavena
* URL or Web page : http://github.com/luislavena/rake-compiler
* License : Expat
Description : Rake-based Ruby Extension (C, Java) task
Package: wnpp
Owner: Youhei SASAKI
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: ruby-albino
Version : 1.3.3
Upstream Author : Chris Wanstrath
* URL or Web page : http://github.com/github/albino
* License : Expat
Description : Ruby wrapper for pygments
Albino is a ruby wrappe
Package: wnpp
Owner: Youhei SASAKI
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: ruby-classifier
Version : 1.3.3
Upstream Author : Lucas Carlson, David Fayram II, Cameron McBride
* URL or Web page : http://classifier.rufy.comp
* License : LGPL-2.0+
Description : Ruby module to
Roger Leigh writes:
> I would much rather we had a more general mechanism of storing the real
> configuration files (as opposed to just md5s) by dpkg itself, which
> would enable proper merging of admin changes between old and new
> conffiles, and perhaps also allow dpkg to implement ucf-like con
Package: wnpp
Owner: Youhei SASAKI
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: ruby-fast-stemmer
Version : 1.0.1
Upstream Author : Roman Shterenzon
* URL or Web page : http://github.com/romanbsd/fast-stemmer
* License : Expat
Description : Ruby module of Fast Porter stemmer b
Thomas Goirand writes:
> Section 10.7.2 of dpm:
> "Any configuration files created or used by your package must reside in
> |/etc|."
"Configuration file" is a term of art that is previously defined in the
Policy document. It doesn't mean what you're taking it to mean.
There isn't anything abo
Package: wnpp
Owner: Youhei SASAKI
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: ruby-directory-watcher
Version : 1.4.1
Upstream Author : Tim Pease
* URL or Web page : http://gemcutter.org/gems/directory_watcher
* License : Expat
Description : Watch directory/files and Generate
Package: wnpp
Owner: Youhei SASAKI
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: ruby-posix-spawn
Version : 0.3.6
Upstream Author : Ryan Tomayko, Aman Gupta
* URL or Web page : http://github.com/rtomayko/posix-spawn
* License : LGPL-2.1+, Expat
Description : Ruby Implementatio
Package: wnpp
Owner: Youhei SASAKI
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: ruby-redcarpet
Version : 2.1.1
Upstream Author : Natacha Porte', Vincent Marti
* URL or Web page : http://github.com/tanoku/redcarpet
* License : Expat
Description : Fast, safe and extensible Markd
Package: wnpp
Owner: Youhei SASAKI
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: jekyll
Version : 0.11.2
Upstream Author : Tom Preston-Werner
* URL or Web page : http://github.com/mojombo/jekyll
* License : Expat
Description : Simple, blog aware, static site generator written i
On 11/05/2012 15:29, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> The setting of unix rights 0440 is indeed very amusing.
Yes. Maybe the mean to chmod a-w everything, for some applications will
not work with so large modes (sudo, for example).
> The only nice point about this proposal is that it's going to make happ
On 05/11/2012 11:08 PM, Marvin Renich wrote:
> For clarity, the etc-overrides-non-etc model that I am talking about is
> where the file in /etc can override individual values, not where the
> file in /etc must replace the entirety of the non-etc configuration.
>
This case is much much more accep
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 01:12:37 +0900, Youhei SASAKI wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Owner: Youhei SASAKI
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: ruby-posix-spawn
Do you really need a whole package for a single syscall wrapper?
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On 05/12/2012 12:22 AM, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> I find your attitude assumes users always have the knowledge and the
> time to investigate everything. This is not the reality.
>
> Sincerly,
>
Not at all. Anyone without the knowledge will not be able to
restore anything anyway.
Anyone wi
On 11/05/2012 19:03, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 05/12/2012 12:22 AM, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
>> I find your attitude assumes users always have the knowledge and the
>> time to investigate everything. This is not the reality.
>>
>> Sincerly,
>>
> Not at all. Anyone without the knowledge wil
Thomas Goirand writes:
> Seriously, can't someone who broke his configuration wget the package,
> and use mc to get into the .deb and get the original configuration
> file???
FWIW, I'd love an easier way to keep track of my /etc, where upstream
changes and my own are on a separate branch. So the
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On May 11, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
>> > Long story short, I still don't see what the fuss is about.
>> The fuss is about we're being told that there will be silent
>> overwriting of configuration files without being prompted about
>> changes, which potential
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 05/11/2012 08:33 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
>> Am 11.05.2012 14:30, schrieb Marco d'Itri:
>>
>>> The problem with etc-overrides-lib is that a file must be copied in
>>> full from /lib to /etc to be modified, and then future changes to the
>>> same file in /lib will
OoO Peu avant le début de l'après-midi du vendredi 11 mai 2012, vers
13:20, Gergely Nagy disait :
>>> In other words, it does *exactly* the same thing systemd is
>>> criticised for.
>>>
>>
>> Which doesn't mean that it's a good practice.
> Tell me what you would gain, if there were no file
SEEWEB - Marco d'Itri writes:
> But this is a user error. The point is that with etc-overrides-lib there
> is no prompt at all when the upstream configuration changes.
Bzzt. There's no prompt ever when upstream defaults change. Unless *all*
the defaults are laid out in /etc, *AND* the user modi
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 05/11/2012 11:08 PM, Marvin Renich wrote:
>> For clarity, the etc-overrides-non-etc model that I am talking about is
>> where the file in /etc can override individual values, not where the
>> file in /etc must replace the entirety of the non-etc configuration.
>>
>
Tollef Fog Heen writes:
> ]] Gergely Nagy
>
>> Tollef Fog Heen writes:
>>
>> > ]] Gergely Nagy
>
>> >> In that case, the including file can be changed (by the admin) to be a
>> >> separate file, that does not include, and get the usual conffile
>> >> conflict dpkg prompt.
>> >
>> > How would
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 11:08:32AM -0400, Marvin Renich wrote:
> The FHS is very specific that /etc is for *Host-specific* system
> configuration, not upstream defaults or distribution-specific
> configuration. The clear intent is that this is where files that are
> intended to be modified by the
Steve Langasek writes:
> What *is* an issue is when upstreams decide to ship their defaults in
> /usr, but require users to duplicate information between /usr templates
> and /etc config files and ignore the contents of /usr in favor of the
> contents of /etc. This is also not a violation of FHS
* Steve Langasek [120511 16:17]:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 11:08:32AM -0400, Marvin Renich wrote:
> > The FHS is very specific that /etc is for *Host-specific* system
>
> No, this is a total retcon. When the FHS was written, this was definitely
> NOT a shared understanding of a difference betwee
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Stefan Handschuh
* Package name: libballoontip-java
Version : 1.2.1
Upstream Author : Bernhard Pauler , Tim
Molderez
* URL : http://java.net/projects/balloontip
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Java
Description
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Matthew Woodcraft wrote:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I think the core question is: why is base-files special? Yes, it's
>> essential and all, but that doesn't address the case of packages being
>> downloaded separate from Debian, or unpacked by hand, in which case we
>>
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 13:41:32 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 11:53:34AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> > >If dpkg kept a copy of the original configuration file (to be retrieved
> > >at all times), it would be easier to spot local changes.
> >
Michael Gilbert writes:
> So, I think [0] is the most astute message in that thread.
> [0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2000/11/msg00251.html
I thought that too when I first read it, but later in the thread are very
cogent arguments for why it's wrong and providing a complete copy of t
Le Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:10:17PM -0400, Michael Gilbert a écrit :
>
> Succinctly, the copyright file itself is irrelevant in the source
> package since the upstream source should have all of that information
> already, and at least for the GPL you can distribute source packages
> as is. Thus, t
Charles Plessy writes:
> given that the source and binary packages are considered a single entity
> -- otherwise we would be violating the GPLs v1 and v2 -- the Debian
> copyright file is not necessary from a strictly legal point of view.
I don't see the logical justification for this statement.
Le Fri, May 11, 2012 at 07:52:05PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> Charles Plessy writes:
>
> > given that the source and binary packages are considered a single entity
> > -- otherwise we would be violating the GPLs v1 and v2 -- the Debian
> > copyright file is not necessary from a strictly lega
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Taku YASUI
* Package name: libnet-traceroute-perl
Version : 1.13
Upstream Author : Daniel Hagerty
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Net-Traceroute/
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Perl
Description : tracerout
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Taku YASUI
* Package name: libnet-traceroute-pureperl-perl
Version : 0.10
Upstream Author : Tom Scanlan
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Net-Traceroute-PurePerl/
* License : Perl
Programming Lang: Perl
Description
86 matches
Mail list logo
