Re: ITA: tftpd-hpa
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 12:18:07PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Marco d'Itri (md@Linux.IT) wrote:
> > On Feb 19, "Oliver M . Bolzer" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > >I'm going to adopt tftpd-hpa in agreement with the current
> > >maintainer (see #130801). In case anybody objects or has
> > >any other form of input, please speak up now.
> > Do we really need two TFTP daemons? Can one of them be killed?
> Do we really need two FTP daemons?
> Or two shells?
> Or two inetd's?
> (being a bit sarcastic if you hadn't noticed)
..and therefore failing to answer Marco's question.
Marco's point, I presume, is that whilst shells and FTP daemons are
complex and highly configurable beasts, with different tools suiting
different jobs, a TFTP daemon is much, much simpler. So simpler that
it might be suggested that one size would fit all.
I have no idea if that's true.