Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 18:18:09 -0400
From: Jason Hellenthal <jhell@DataIX.net>
To: Olli Hauer <ohauer@freebsd.org>
Cc: ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: security/{nmap,zenmap} consolodation
Message-ID: <20110704221809.GC4502@DataIX.net>
In-Reply-To: <4E122446.8000401@FreeBSD.org>
References: <20110704144853.GA42273@DataIX.net> <4E122446.8000401@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 10:36:22PM +0200, Olli Hauer wrote: > On 2011-07-04 16:48, Jason Hellenthal wrote: > > > > Hi ohauer@ > > > > I was curious if you would be intnerested in consolidating > > security/zenmap into security/nmap with the options framework and > > deprecating security/zenmap since it continually falls pretty far behind > > newer versions of nmap in ports. > > > > I am fairly sure that within the next couple days I could come up with a > > prototype Makefile for this if you are interested or would like me to do > > so but I don't want to put any time into it if this will not happen. > > > > Let me know what you think. > > I haven't touched zenmap because I don't use a gui on any of my FreeBSD > machines (my gui replacement is parameter -oN / -oG and vi ;) > Thats also the reason for me to keep the ports nmap/zenmap separate. Understandable. ;) > > If you have patches for zenmap or perhaps want to maintain zenmap I'm fine > with it. Some people have mentioned a slave port. Would you mind if that happened ?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110704221809.GC4502>