On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 07:32:20PM -0400, Aubin Paul wrote: > On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 10:41:17PM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 02, 2001 at 12:26:53PM -0400, Aubin Paul wrote: > > > This might be a little off, but why not have a Debian package called > > > nullinetd, that just provides netkit-inetd, but is essentially empty? > > > > Well that can be a thing. But packages that does not really need inetd > > should not depend on it. I have heared that some packages do but > > that should be changed. But of course I can add such a package > > if people wants that. :) > > Well, I only suggest this since the netbase maintainer seems reluctant > to remove the dependency on inetd... since netbase is essential, inetd > is by inference, also... so either he fixes it, or we workaround. You apparently missed the mail today discussing a netbase split so netbase won't depend on inetd. -- Nathan Norman - Staff Engineer | A good plan today is better Micromuse Ltd. | than a perfect plan tomorrow. mailto:nnorman@micromuse.com | -- Patton
Attachment:
pgpSCW7o8QDrA.pgp
Description: PGP signature