[Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 01:59:43AM +0100, Joerg Mayer wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 04:24:55PM -0800, Guy Harris wrote:
> > One disadvantage of that solution is, of course, that you'd only be able
> > to use it with versions of libpcap that support that split of parsing
> > and code generation.
> 
> Actually, I'd prefer to just take the code and put it into wiretap, just
> as we are providing our own versions of vsnprintf etc in case they are
> missing.

That's not the same - we provide "snprintf()" etc. only to allow us to
use them on systems that lack them, not to provide an "snprintf()" that
has a particular minimum set of features.

If we make our own copy of libpcap:

	When would we update it?  When a new libpcap release comes out?
	Whenever anything's checked into libpcap CVS?  Whenever anything
	interesting is checked into libpcap CVS?  Etc..

	What about WinPcap, which includes more stuff than just libpcap
	- it includes drivers and a low-level library that's used by the
	libpcap portion?

	Would developers understand that

		1) It's BSD-licensed, not GPLed, and all changes to our
		   copy will be BSD-licensed?

		2) Any improvements we make *WILL* be propagated to
		   tcpdump.org's libpcap?