Re: And now for something completely different... etch!
Andrew Suffield <email@example.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 09:37:29AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 02:32:53PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 01:03:12AM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote:
>> > > - inetd begone! -> xinetd (better mechanism to control DoS, privilege
>> > > separation, etc.)
>> > xinetd begone. There is no justification for using anything resembling
>> > inetd on a modern system.
>> Why? What if I prefer to have something from inetd only when necessary
>> instead of constantly running daemons everywhere?
> Why on earth would you? It's just more administrative overhead, and
> yet another package you didn't need.
Because I've something else to do with my RAM than to run yet another
daemon that will be used at most every other month.