Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> Considering upstream is dead, the package hasn't been updated since
> woody, it's (RC) buggy and alternatives exist which you recommend using
> instead, do you think that it might be better to remove this package
> from Debian? Or is there still a need to keep it?
>
> If y
Tommi Virtanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In conclusion, it doesn't quite work as advertised.
>
> So it seems. I recall packaging rain because of the --sim features.
> In over 3.5 years, upstream has not released a new version, so I
> think one can safely assume this piece of software is forg
Yotam Rubin wrote:
> Invoking rain thusly - "rain --syn -t XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX -p "
> results in the following generated packet:
>
> 02:57:41.945229 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 14419, offset 0, flags [none],
> proto: TCP (6), length: 535) 192.117.105.64.420 > 132.72.40.8.: tcp 515
> [bad hdr
Package: rain
Version: 1.2.9beta1-1
Severity: serious
Invoking rain thusly - "rain --syn -t XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX -p "
results in the following generated packet:
02:57:41.945229 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 14419, offset 0, flags [none], proto:
TCP (6), length: 535) 192.117.105.64.420 > 132.72.40.8.4
4 matches
Mail list logo
