Re: Status of inetd for etch

[Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>]

[Roger Leigh]
> Any thoughts or comments?

For the LTSP thin client environment, I switched to openbsd-inetd
because I could not avoid an inetd, and the openbsd version didn't
start when no service was enabled in /etc/inetd.conf.  We do the same
in Debian-edu.  A minor problem is that we are unable to remove
netkit-inetd from the CD, because debootstrap claim it is a required
part of base and refuses to accept openbsd-inetd in its place.  The
latter might be because we use debootstrap from sarge.

I am all for replacing netkit-inetd with something less broken, and
preferably make it possible to install a minimal installation like the
diskless LTSP clients without such package.  We want these clients
booting on 32 MiB of ram, including the ramdisk, so every KiB of
memory saved counts.  :)

Friendly,
-- 
Petter Reinholdtsen