On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 09:37:29AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 02:32:53PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 01:03:12AM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote: > > > - inetd begone! -> xinetd (better mechanism to control DoS, privilege > > > separation, etc.) > > > > xinetd begone. There is no justification for using anything resembling > > inetd on a modern system. > > > Why? What if I prefer to have something from inetd only when necessary > instead of constantly running daemons everywhere? Why on earth would you? It's just more administrative overhead, and yet another package you didn't need. > > > - Better OS backup management -> upgrade rollback? > > > > Selecting one of the many existing viable methods is pointless, as > > most people will just have to get rid of it again before using > > whatever they prefer. Creating a new one seems equally pointless. We > > do not have a shortage of backup tools. If you have specific issues > > with the particular tool you use, you know where to send them. > > > I think he was referring to being able to rollback to an earlier version > of an installed package. Something which is currently not supported, > AIUI. Maybe even an earlier release of Debian. It's supported just fine if you take backups at the appropriate moment. I can't think of any useful way in which it could be more supported than that. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature