Hi, On Wed, 19.12.2007 at 18:23:19 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, personally, I'd rather not have such a thing in Debian with that name. > And the fact that upstream called it that way doesn't speak highly of the > tool, either IMHO.
well, the latest release of that tool is dated 2004, and it was developed by a person who has no primary interest in network traffic analysis. Having said that, I have also to say that > We have *real* tcp stream/flow watchers and recorders in Debian already. > Also, ethereal/wireshark can postprocess and analyze http traffic, if you > require a GUI. If this new tool can do better for http traffic (which I this is highly irrelevant for the matter at hand because this tool is specifically well suited to be used as a tool from inside funkload (not by humans directly these days) to record web requests and write them to file as Python code which you can later modify to automate web-related tasks, or run tests against web based applications. Rewriting funkload to do that with a different tool, eg. wireshark, is nigh impossible, or at least highly unreasonable, given that the tcpwatch script is 1485 lines of pure Python _only_, with no external dependencies. > don't doubt it could, but it is not certain so far), it should at least be > properly named... And if it cannot do better than the tools we already have > in the archive, why package it? It enhances the functionality of funkload in a very good way many users of funkload actually use, and it fits into the funkload suite like a glove, so to say. It's more like a libary than a self-contained program except that it actually is, and still has its own Tkinter GUI, too (for those of us who like retro computing). Best, --Toni++ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
