Allen Briggs <briggs@canolog.ninthwonder.com>  wrote:
 > > In fact I sent the patches to LBL first - who gave that reason.  So I
 > > PR'd them incase anyone in NetBSD land wanted them - they were
 > > rejected for the same reason (or more correctly as you've pointed out
 > > because LBL didn't want them).
 > 
 > Is this a valid reason for NetBSD not including or supporting the
 > patches?  It seems to add a useful feature to tcpdump.  One that has
 > at least as much potential use as for abuse.  Looking at the source,

Personally, I wouldn't oppose putting such changes into our tree. I know
I've longed for such an option to tcpdump; not even for sinister reasons
either... For genuine debugging reasons... I always end up doing binary
output and piping it through 'strings' but that's only marginally helpful.

I wouldn't be opposed to changes that gave the hex data on the left and
the ascii data on the right...