Re: Bug#38523: ipopd: doesn't care about other pop-3 daemons
- To: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Cc: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Bug#38523: ipopd: doesn't care about other pop-3 daemons
- From: Josip Rodin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 09:59:49 +0200
- Message-id: <19990602095949.B20963@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
- In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.email@example.com>; from Jaldhar H. Vyas on Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 10:23:50PM -0400
- References: <19990530100650.B30300@cibalia.gkvk.hr> <Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Tue, Jun 01, 1999 at 10:23:50PM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> > No, that is not what I meant. I had both ipopd and qpopper installed,
> > and qpopper was enabled in /etc/inetd.conf. Then I removed ipopd, and
> > its postrm script removed qpopper's entry from /etc/inetd.conf!
> IMO the package system should not allow you to do this. What is the point
> of installing two of exactly the same kind of server? It's not like web
> servers were you could have two different ones running on different ports.
> In any case there is nothing in policy to say such a configuration has to
> be supported.
Exactly. Shall I file a bug against all the POP3 servers to provide some
virtual package, e.g. pop3-daemon, and then conflict with each other
(through Conflicts: pop3-daemon )?
Crossposting to debian-devel so others can comment.
enJoy -*/\*- http://jagor.srce.hr/~jrodin/