On Aug 01, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote: > > Again, the update-inetd interface is formally provided by > > inet-superserver and not by update-inetd. > So there's no allowance for a package that wants to interface with inetd if > it's installed, but doesn't depend on inetd being installed? So far this case has not been handled automatically and I do not think it is worth supporting because it would require creating stand-alone update-inetd packages for each kind of inetd. I also do not think it is a very /useful/ feature since I cannot see a big difference between editing /etc/inetd.conf to uncomment a line and editing /etc/inetd.conf to paste a line from README.Debian. > > > But I would still like input on the use of this dependency for samba; I > > > rather expect we would get complaints if samba depended on inet-superserver > > > when it doesn't use it in the default configuration. > > Do not depend on the presence of /usr/sbin/update-inetd then. > How should idempotent maintainer scripts that call update-inetd work > otherwise? I'd rather not leave cruft around in /etc/inetd.conf as a > consequence of inet-superserver not being installed at the right moment. As usual, do not call update-inetd then. -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature