Nmap Development: Re: ambiguity about nmap results

["DePriest, Jason R." <jrdepriest () gmail com>]

Debian is worse, much worse.  Both the test and unstable branches have
4.53-3 as the latest.

Stable is listed as 4.11-1!  According to the nmap changelog, that was
"stable" on 2006/06/23, coming close to two years ago.  Nmap is so
much better than it was back then!

Ugh.  I just roll my own.

On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Brandon Enright <> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, 30 May 2008 22:22:46 +0300
> "sara fink" <sara.fink () gmail com> wrote:
>
> > on my laptop I have nmap version 4.60 from gentoo portage.
> > 4.62 appears as non stable in portage.
> The Gentoo arch/~arch model (as well as most other distributions notion
> of stable/unstable) typically doesn't match the Nmap development cycle.
>
> For Nmap it is generally the case that x.z is /more/ stable and better
> tested than x.y when z > y.
>
> At least for nmap, you probably should add
>
> # Networking (or ~x86, etc)
> net-analyzer/nmap ~amd64
>
> to /etc/portage/package.keywords
>
> I love Gentoo but don't expect the devs and package maintainers to make
> the best decisions for your particular usage case.
>
> Brandon
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkhAXUgACgkQqaGPzAsl94LR8ACeOTZjoZZT2YJHN2uFfJCWQipz
> um0AoIpj0tyw04uMtA5rFDFTqOBROzlV
> =aZs7
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://SecLists.Org