From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 1 19:33:09 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D0AF16A4F4 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2005 19:33:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail22.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail22.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.24]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EDBF43D5A for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2005 19:33:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org) Received: (qmail 22884 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2005 19:33:08 -0000 Received: from dsl092-078-145.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO be-well.ilk.org) ([66.92.78.145]) (envelope-sender ) by mail22.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 1 Feb 2005 19:33:08 -0000 Received: by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix, from userid 1147) id DDA6484; Tue, 1 Feb 2005 14:33:07 -0500 (EST) Sender: lowell@be-well.ilk.org To: Paul Schmehl To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <7592B03796CF6306CA59FEE3@utd49554.utdallas.edu> From: Lowell Gilbert Date: 01 Feb 2005 14:33:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: <7592B03796CF6306CA59FEE3@utd49554.utdallas.edu> Message-ID: <44brb4m5xo.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> Lines: 11 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: ports libpcap X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 19:33:09 -0000 Paul Schmehl writes: > I just discovered that there is a port of libpcap. Does anybody know > if it performs better than the pcap that comes with FreeBSD? Why? Are you having problems with it? The reason there is a port at all is to support people who might be looking for more recent features than the version in the tree. At the moment, I'm not sure there are any significant differences; speed won't be different, though.