On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 01:12:12PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: > > Or maybe everyone (well, the people who do the work :-)) will decide > that they can use tcpwrappers to control access to the portmapper, and > that such would be sufficient. That would be bug #62145 which I'm sending an (untested) patch to right away.... :-) Regards Javi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature