11–20 of 87 posts
Windows can install full Linux distro via WSL. You can have a nmap in two minutes! I like it much better than MacBook with its incompatible ARM cpu, and outdated commands from some ancient BSD!
It's been a year or two but last time I tried networking tools like nmap in WSL I would get all kinds of errors.
Windows can install full Linux distro via WSL. You can have a nmap in two minutes! I like it much better than MacBook with its incompatible ARM cpu, and outdated commands from some ancient BSD!
Yes ever since the M1 chip it’s just annoying to work on the M1. Day to day it doesn’t matter much but it wastes days of times the few times i ran into an issue. I wish companies would stop defaulting to macs for development
The year was 2002, the 2.4 Linux kernel had just been released and I was making money on the side building monitoring software for a few thousand (mostly Solaris) hosts owned by a large German car manufacturer. Everything was built in parallel ksh code, “deployed” to Solaris 8 on Sun E10Ks, and mostly kicked off by cron. Keeping total script runtime down to avoid process buildup and delay was critical. The biggest offender: long timeouts for host/port combinations that would sporadically not be available.
Eventually, I grabbed W. Richard Stevens’ UNIX network programming book and created tcping [0]. FreeBSD, NetBSD, a series of Linux distros picked it up at the time and it was steady decline from there… good times!
[0]: https://github.com/mkirchner/tcping
edit: grammar
Windows can install full Linux distro via WSL. You can have a nmap in two minutes! I like it much better than MacBook with its incompatible ARM cpu, and outdated commands from some ancient BSD!
Yes ever since the M1 chip it’s just annoying to work on the M1. Day to day it doesn’t matter much but it wastes days of times the few times i ran into an issue. I wish companies would stop defaulting to macs for development
You can check a port like this, saves a few round trips on a good day.
$ dstp google.com --port 80
Ping: 27.44ms
DNS: resolving 216.58.212.14
SystemDNS: resolving 2a00:1450:4017:804::200e, 142.250.187.174
TLS: certificate is valid for 64 more days
HTTPS: got 200 OK
I sometimes wonder why we still use port numbers. Wouldn't it make much more sense to use strings to name ports?
It's ancient, but still present on every Linux and MacOS system.
I sometimes wonder why we still use port numbers. Wouldn't it make much more sense to use strings to name ports?
/etc/services assigns a string to every port number. It's ancient, but still present on every Linux and MacOS system.
The big downside of this is that you can get clashes. For example, VNC uses 5901 and up on my system. What if I have some other service that uses ports in the same range?
A more sane approach would be to call those ports e.g. vnc/work, vnc/meeting, etc. so there would be no conflicts and you would know what each port is used for. And it would work even if you don't have write-access to /etc/services.