Re: dh_installinetd
Brian May <bam@debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 12:02:44PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
>> Marco d'Itri wrote:
>>> Yes. A RFC-822-like file would probably be appropriate.
>> And this, it seems to me, is exactly how to get around the debhelper UI
>> issues. If the updte-inetd programs use a common file like that,
>> debhelper just installs it, and there is only one interface to learn.
> Good point.
> So what do people thing of this as a starting point?
> --- cut ---
> Service: kerberos-adm
> Group: OTHER
> Disabled: no
> Type: stream/TCP/nowait
> User: root
> Group: root
> Command: /usr/lib/heimdal-servers/kadmind
> Parameters:
> Maximum-Concurrent-Connections: 10
> Changed: 0.0-1
We are talking about shipping thes snippets in the package and
update-inetdv2 uses 'run-parts' to cat them together?
I am missing "Enabled: yes/no" and would like to derive from strict
RFC-822-format and allow comment-lines.
> Just some points:
[...]
> 2. Presumably the user would still customize the /etc/inetd.conf
> file or the /etc/xinetd.conf file.
Parsing *inetd.conf might be challenging, imho our file should support
as many options as possible, so that perople can edit
/etc/up-inetd.d/daemon with dpkg-conffile protection.
If you just offer the bare minimum of options in /etc/up-inetd.d/* you
must parse *inetd.conf and merge/overrride options because people must
customize *inetd.conf.
[...]
> 6. I have assumed that setting up xinetd.conf to listen only on
> certain addresses, etc, is a system-admin function, and should not
> be listed in above file.
See above. Additionally obenbsd-inetd which afaik is supposed to
replace netkit-inetd as Debian's standard inetd supports this feature,
too.
cu andreas
Reply to: