Hi list.
I recently installed Fedora and today I got a little time after work to configure it on my laptop. The first thing I did was configure the network to access to the internet and to my LAN at home. To test the connection I used netcat to listen to a dummy port, as I usually do. The thing I discovered is that nc on Fedora has a different manpage, a different binary and almost different syntax.
Why?!
On every other distribution nc is the same and has the same syntax. Why does Fedora used a different version, maybe patched or totally different application... with the same name?
How can I be totally sure that netcat is the only command with a different syntax? Should I learn other syntaxes for each command, again? :O
I'd like to have the original software in my Linux distribution, and as closed as possible to other distros (which probably use the original).
Maybe this netcat is another version of the original, also shipped by its author which I've never seen before...
Thanks for explanations.
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Giuseppe Fuggiano giuseppe.fuggiano@gmail.com wrote:
Hi list.
I recently installed Fedora and today I got a little time after work to configure it on my laptop. The first thing I did was configure the network to access to the internet and to my LAN at home. To test the connection I used netcat to listen to a dummy port, as I usually do. The thing I discovered is that nc on Fedora has a different manpage, a different binary and almost different syntax.
Fedora's package uses the nc codebase from openBSD. rpm -qi nc
We package things with the upstream project url encoded in the header information so you know exactly where the sourcecode base is coming from in our packages. Do the other distributions you use do they same? Do you know where the upstream source distribution of their netcat package is?
Is there another actively maintained netcat upstream project codebase that you were expecting to find? My understanding is that that the netcat 1.10 version that some other distros ship..is a dead upstream project. If I'm mistaken, please let me know where it is.
rpm -q --changelog nc and you find this:
* Thu Mar 31 2005 Radek Vokal rvokal@redhat.com 1.77-1 - switching to new OpenBSD version of netcat
The switch to OpenBSD's actively maintained netcat codebase was made in March 2005.
Why?!
On every other distribution nc is the same and has the same syntax.
Because we think its appropriate to track upstream project releases as much as is reasonable. Holding netcat at an old release version for cross 'linux' distro compatibility isn't necessarily inline with that, neither is holding onto codebases with a dead codebase for several years when there is an alternative and active upstream to migrate to.
-jef
2009/1/9 Jeff Spaleta jspaleta@gmail.com:
Fedora's package uses the nc codebase from openBSD. rpm -qi nc
We package things with the upstream project url encoded in the header information so you know exactly where the sourcecode base is coming from in our packages. Do the other distributions you use do they same? Do you know where the upstream source distribution of their netcat package is?
Yes, probably from the "old" netcat.
Is there another actively maintained netcat upstream project codebase that you were expecting to find? My understanding is that that the netcat 1.10 version that some other distros ship..is a dead upstream project. If I'm mistaken, please let me know where it is.
I don't know exactly. But probably the choice of take that upstream project codebase makes some sense...
The switch to OpenBSD's actively maintained netcat codebase was made in March 2005.
Does that netcat version is shipped under BSD license, or still GNU/GPL?
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Giuseppe Fuggiano giuseppe.fuggiano@gmail.com wrote:
Does that netcat version is shipped under BSD license, or still GNU/GPL?
First why do you assume it was GPL before? Can you emphatically state that the license on the version you are expecting was in fact the GPL? I can not find reference to the GPL in packaging of other distributions that I have just checked. OpenSuse and Debian ship a netcat which is effectively public domain, according to the copyright notices I have found.
Second, since the Fedora package points you to the upstream source you have the ability to check the license for yourself quite easily. I don't think its GPL by looking at the c files in the openbsd cvs system. I should file a bug about that against the nc package to get its license tag changed accordingly.
-jef
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 14:24 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Giuseppe Fuggiano giuseppe.fuggiano@gmail.com wrote:
Does that netcat version is shipped under BSD license, or still GNU/GPL?
First why do you assume it was GPL before? Can you emphatically state that the license on the version you are expecting was in fact the GPL? I can not find reference to the GPL in packaging of other distributions that I have just checked. OpenSuse and Debian ship a netcat which is effectively public domain, according to the copyright notices I have found.
---- http://directory.fsf.org/project/netcat/
Craig
Craig White wrote:
I can not find reference to the GPL in packaging of other distributions that I have just checked. OpenSuse and Debian ship a netcat which is effectively public domain, according to the copyright notices I have found.
There are apparently at least 3 versions:
1. Classic Netcat (http://www.atstake.com/research/tools/) [URL no longer works, since company has been bought by Symantec], under non-standard permissive license (http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/n/netcat/netcat_1.10-38/ne...). 2. GNU Netcat (http://netcat.sourceforge.net/), under GPL 2. 3. OpenBSD Netcat (http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/nc/) under 2-clause BSD.
Matt Flaschen
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
which distributions ship that. OpenSuse isn't shipping that as far as I can tell. Neither is Debian stable. Fedora's never shipped that. It appears to be a fork of the original codebase if I'm reading the page sf.net project page correctly. I don't see any evidence of activity since 2004 in the cvs tree.
http://netcat.cvs.sourceforge.net/netcat/netcat/
are you sure its an actively maintained project? I dont see any bug activity of merit indicating maintainer responsiveness since 2006..
-jef
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 14:58 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
which distributions ship that. OpenSuse isn't shipping that as far as I can tell. Neither is Debian stable. Fedora's never shipped that. It appears to be a fork of the original codebase if I'm reading the page sf.net project page correctly. I don't see any evidence of activity since 2004 in the cvs tree.
http://netcat.cvs.sourceforge.net/netcat/netcat/
are you sure its an actively maintained project? I dont see any bug activity of merit indicating maintainer responsiveness since 2006..
---- I don't know squat about it - just thought I would point out that an apparent GPL version of netcat exists.
Craig
2009/1/10 Jeff Spaleta jspaleta@gmail.com:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Giuseppe Fuggiano giuseppe.fuggiano@gmail.com wrote:
Does that netcat version is shipped under BSD license, or still GNU/GPL?
First why do you assume it was GPL before? Can you emphatically state that the license on the version you are expecting was in fact the GPL? I can not find reference to the GPL in packaging of other distributions that I have just checked. OpenSuse and Debian ship a netcat which is effectively public domain, according to the copyright notices I have found.
From the sources... check the COPYING file.
http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/download.sourceforge.net/pub/sourceforge/...
I was talking about the 0.7.1 version shipped by my previous distribution, which in fact is not updated since 2004.
Second, since the Fedora package points you to the upstream source you have the ability to check the license for yourself quite easily. I don't think its GPL by looking at the c files in the openbsd cvs system. I should file a bug about that against the nc package to get its license tag changed accordingly.
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/nc/
It seems to be a BSD license. I choosen Linux for the GPL license and I usually avoid the non-GPL software (Free Software) when adviced of that, of course.
So, let's install *BSD.
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 00:41 +0100, Giuseppe Fuggiano wrote:
2009/1/10 Jeff Spaleta jspaleta@gmail.com:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Giuseppe Fuggiano giuseppe.fuggiano@gmail.com wrote:
Does that netcat version is shipped under BSD license, or still GNU/GPL?
First why do you assume it was GPL before? Can you emphatically state that the license on the version you are expecting was in fact the GPL? I can not find reference to the GPL in packaging of other distributions that I have just checked. OpenSuse and Debian ship a netcat which is effectively public domain, according to the copyright notices I have found.
From the sources... check the COPYING file.
http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/download.sourceforge.net/pub/sourceforge/...
I was talking about the 0.7.1 version shipped by my previous distribution, which in fact is not updated since 2004.
Second, since the Fedora package points you to the upstream source you have the ability to check the license for yourself quite easily. I don't think its GPL by looking at the c files in the openbsd cvs system. I should file a bug about that against the nc package to get its license tag changed accordingly.
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/nc/
It seems to be a BSD license. I choosen Linux for the GPL license and I usually avoid the non-GPL software (Free Software) when adviced of that, of course.
So, let's install *BSD.
---- I think just about all BSD licenses are GPL compatible with the exception of what is referred to as the 'Original BSD License' because of an advertising clause that was in the license.
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/
one thing is for sure though, openbsd is all about free license
Craig
Giuseppe Fuggiano wrote:
It seems to be a BSD license. I choosen Linux for the GPL license and I usually avoid the non-GPL software (Free Software) when adviced of that, of course.
2 clause BSD is free software, and in fact GPL-compatible. It's not copyleft itself, but that's no reason to reject it.
Matt Flaschen
Giuseppe Fuggiano wrote:
Hi list.
I recently installed Fedora and today I got a little time after work to configure it on my laptop. The first thing I did was configure the network to access to the internet and to my LAN at home. To test the connection I used netcat to listen to a dummy port, as I usually do. The thing I discovered is that nc on Fedora has a different manpage, a different binary and almost different syntax.
Why?!
On every other distribution nc is the same and has the same syntax. Why does Fedora used a different version, maybe patched or totally different application... with the same name?
How can I be totally sure that netcat is the only command with a different syntax? Should I learn other syntaxes for each command, again? :O
I'd like to have the original software in my Linux distribution, and as closed as possible to other distros (which probably use the original).
Maybe this netcat is another version of the original, also shipped by its author which I've never seen before...
Thanks for explanations.
Welcome to current! Or, more current. :)
There are a LOT of major changes from
nc-1.10 (RHE4) to nc-1.84 (F10)
I suspect you are experiencing only version differences.
The man pages from the two versions above are VERY different, although common options seem to be the same.
Good luck!