Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: ambiguity about nmap results
From: "sara fink" <sara.fink () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 23:22:29 +0300
That's why I don't use debian or ubuntu or the like. gentoo is really great, but not for everyone. It requires some sophistication, willing to invest the time. On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:17 PM, DePriest, Jason R. <jrdepriest () gmail com> wrote:
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
_______________________________________________ Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev Archived at http://SecLists.Org
Current thread:
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results, (continued)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results DePriest, Jason R. (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results sara fink (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results sara fink (May 30)
- RE: ambiguity about nmap results Rob Nicholls (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results sara fink (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results sara fink (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results Mike pattrick (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results sara fink (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results DePriest, Jason R. (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results Brandon Enright (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results sara fink (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results DePriest, Jason R. (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results sara fink (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results Kris Katterjohn (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results doug (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results sara fink (May 30)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results bensonk (May 31)
- Re: ambiguity about nmap results doug (May 31)
- RE: ambiguity about nmap results Aaron Leininger (May 31)