Bug 7264 - ping -c fails to operate as expected
ping -c fails to operate as expected
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 8724
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: netkit-base (Show other bugs)
6.1
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Jeff Johnson
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 1999-11-23 13:19 EST by Kevin L. Mitchell
Modified: 2008-05-01 11:37 EDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2000-01-27 15:07:06 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Kevin L. Mitchell 1999-11-23 13:19:00 EST
I frequently do ping -c 100 <hostname>; I expect it to send exactly
100 packets and tell me how many it got back, along with all the
statistics it reports.  However, the change apparently introduced
with RedHat 6.0 causes it to wait until it receives 100 responses,
which is exactly the opposite of every single ping program I have
ever used, and exactly the opposite of the way I want it to work.
There is no option to revert this blatently broken behavior, either.
Comment 1 kvaradhan 2000-01-13 13:44:59 EST
Also: for all related ping -c bugs reported:


Redhat-6.1, the ping-ank.patch is broken (probably also the kuznetsov patch).
Fix the patch by hand, rebuild the rpm and reinstall.   The two lines to fix
are:


% rpm -ivh netkit-base-0.10-37.src.rpm
% cd /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES
% vi ping-ank.patch
	line 929:  Change +725,12 to +725,13
	line 937:  Remove the leading -
	line 1392: Change +1020,7 to +1020,8
	line 1397: Remove the leading -
	Save and exit
% cd /usr/src/rdhat/SPECS
% rpm -bb netkit-base.spec
% cd /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386
% rpm -Uvh --force netkit-base-0.10-37.i386.rpm

People who know this rpm stuff better, or redhat could issue a new patch to
this whole problem.


Kannan
Comment 2 Jeff Johnson 2000-01-27 15:07:59 EST
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 8724 ***

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.