Re: Finger daemons in Debian should use a virtual package
On Mon, May 22, 2000 at 12:44:32PM +0200, Radovan Garabik wrote:
> it does not remove itself from /etc/inetd.conf, just
> comments out
This is another one of those beautiful misfeatures of update-inetd that
confuse everyone using it in packages. update-inetd behaviour makes me feel
If the entry is commented out by the user, i.e. with a single `#',
update-inetd --add won't do anything, while the package maintainer would
expect that his entry would be added, just commented out. That would be an
useful thing to have, and it wouldn't hurt user's settings.
You can't remove your entry selectively: update-inetd --remove will remove
all finger-related entries, because the --pattern option doesn't work with
--remove. Funny thing is, it doesn't abort with an error because of false
arguments, it just silently ignores it and continue.
An evil thing to do, that surprisingly can be done, is to use something like:
update-inetd --disable --pattern in.fingerd --comment-chars '#'
And I've actually seen it used...
It doesn't deal with xinetd at all, just prints a warning, and user has to
do it manually (ok, this is just `wishlist', but it is still annoying).
There's probably more, but I can't think of any right now...
> the point is, unless there is some hairy and complicated testing in
> (pre|post)(inst|rm), the best solution is to make all finger daemons
> conflict with each other.
> And there is not much advantage in having more finger daemons installed
> simultaneously anyway.
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification