Re: Bug#2133: inetd(8) doesn't say whether/when looping services reenabled
Peter Tobias writes ("Re: Bug#2133: inetd(8) doesn't say whether/when looping services reenabled"):
> Is it really important to have different maximum numbers? Normally you
> don't need this feature. If you get the "loop" errors you slightly
> increase the value and it'll work. Maybe the FreeBSD people thought
> the same.
Perhaps. It's just that some people here have had problems with inetd
shutting things down too quickly, though now I come to think of it
their inetd may not have had even the global option.
> > Why are we switching to the FreeBSD inetd ?
> We don't have to switch to the FreeBSD version. The new version contains
> few bug fixes and support for the TCPMUX service. But if nobody wants
> the new version I'll leave the old inetd in the netbase package.
tcpmux ? Is that multi-homing with different `virtual hosts' ?
> If you want to test the new inetd I could upload a binary (or the source)
> to ftp.debian.org or I could send you a copy via email.
I'm sure it's fine.