Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 13:35:54 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: karpen@ocean.campus.luth.se (Mikael Karpberg) Cc: danny@panda.hilink.com.au, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Audible ping response changes to ping.c Message-ID: <199702092035.NAA25176@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199702070720.IAA13734@ocean.campus.luth.se> from "Mikael Karpberg" at Feb 7, 97 08:20:35 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Ok, so it's a nice idea to build functionality from small bits, but > this is ridiculous! :-) We're talking excanging about three lines of > C code with a big script. This is just a way too small change not to > be well jusified to go into ping as an option. The latest patch for ping > seemed just fine, although I'd think '-b' would be more logical. > You think "Hmm... now, what option was it that ping beep? Hmm..." and try > "-b". You don't think "What made ping audiable?". :-P Except that most people wouldn't ever use the option, and some of us are posting these scripts and things because we don't think this one adulteration of 'ping' is generally useful in a general purpose OS. If the point were to get beeps when you are ducked down behind a machine half a lab away futzing with calble, or sitting in front of the same machine futzing with network settings, etc., then Peter's "sed" script is better, since all you want is beeps, not the value of the RTT. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702092035.NAA25176>