On Tue Jun 26 2007 at 18:13:47 +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <20070626180641.GA28661@nimenees.com>,
> Eric Haszlakiewicz  <erh@nimenees.com> wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 01:33:31PM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> >> In article <20070626045707.GA22396@arresum.veego.de>,
> >> Bernd Ernesti  <current-users@NetBSD.org> wrote:
> >> >Hi,
> >> >
> >> >why do we need more programs in the base system and where was
> >> >this dicussed prior before adding it?
> >> >I can understand it for POSIX requirements, but not for other
> >> >tools where it even was not mentioned before adding it.
> >> >
> >> >Regards,
> >> >Bernd
> >> 
> >> Hi Bernd,
> >> 
> >> I considered adding it as an option to cat, but it had ran out of
> >> option letters.
> >
> >There are plenty of letters if we start using long options.
> >(which are much more readable IMO, especially for more esoteric flags)
> 
> More seriously though. This was discussed a lot during 2005 in tech-net.
> As usual the ball was dropped although the consensus was it was a useful
> utility.

I agree on its usefulness.  I have a use for it immediately in testing.
Not that I couldn't to it otherwise, but tcpdrop surely makes it more
practical.  Now if I only bothered to recompile my kernel ....

thanks

-- 
Antti Kantee <pooka@iki.fi>                     Of course he runs NetBSD
http://www.iki.fi/pooka/                          http://www.NetBSD.org/
    "la qualité la plus indispensable du cuisinier est l'exactitude"