There's no need to Cc me to list mails.
On Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 11:28:54PM -0700, Alexander Hvostov wrote:
> What's preventing you from making the new update-inetd command-line compatible
> with the old one?
The old update-inetd command line is what causes most of the problems. Trying
to translate, say,
update-inetd --remove 'talk[[:blank:]].*[[:blank:]]/usr/sbin/in.talkd'
to work with xinetd correctly is non-trivial.
> Sounds like you're making a meta-format for {x,rl,}inetd configuration
> files. In that case, why not make this meta-config-file the _master_
> config file, and have some utility (update-inetd?) update the presently
> installed inetd's configuration.
This would mean that you'd have to add great big signs like "DO NOT EDIT
THIS FILE!!!!" to /etc/inetd.conf, which is what update-inetd goes to
great lengths to avoid.
> That could be interesting in the context of the /etc/inetd.d idea above. Perhaps
> adding a "Disabled: Yes/No" field to the specification for the field names would
> suffice?
You'll note this doesn't work if you distribute the files as part of
the package (automatically modifying conffiles is a no-no).
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Attachment:
pgpodjQHfCtFn.pgp
Description: PGP signature