On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 12:57:03AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > I don't know exactly how it happened, but a large number of maintainers > apparently ignored the discussions on this list and added to their > packages a dependency on update-inetd. > This is *TOTALLY WRONG* because the /usr/sbin/update-inetd interface is > guaranteed to be provided by whatever implements the inet-superserver > virtual package and not by the update-inetd package currently depended > on by some inetd packages. > Indeed, the update-inetd package does not depend on a daemon package nor > it provides one itself. It might be helpful if you could summarise what packages are supposed to be doing here - this may even affect enough packages to warrant a mail to debian-devel-announce. I don't recall ever seeing an announcement about this and I imagine that even among those maintainers who read this list there will be some who have only scanned the threads about inetd since they tend to get a bit bogged down in the details. -- "You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature