[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: stupid dependencies on update-inetd

Hash: SHA1

Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> Hi Marco,
> Am So den 29. Jul 2007 um 18:58 schrieb Marco d'Itri:
>>>> If you want a system without an inetd then do not it install one and do
>>>> not install packages depending on it. It's really that easy.
>>> Sorry but I think you didn't understand what I tryed to explain.
>> I do, it's you who have no idea about the discussions of the past five
>> years.
> Might be. There are so much flame war on that list. Also my English is
> not that good and my spare time not that much that I can read any mail
> in the list; sorry.
> However:
>>> be installed too. Xinetd do disable such a inetd in postinstall script.
>> Yes, the xinetd package needs to be integrated with the rest of Debian.
> I agree.
>>> However. What I did explain is that xinetd do not need to have a
>>> update-inetd as the configuration is done with single files for single
>>> packages.
>> No, it needs an update-inetd program which can create configuration
>> files in the appropriate format.
> Hmmm, Wrong in my opinion. If xinetd would have its own update-inetd and
> software is installed in xinetd and $ADMIN decides to switch back to
> traditional inetd the configuration is inconsistent. Also the way
> around.

False, because if the <new> xinetd uses another config packages, the
system have a config for fallback to inetd-superserver but doesnt have a
working configuration.

Packages need to provide their own update-inetd, and in the case of a
change of inet-superserver, this package manages the calls to touch the
appropiate configuration. Also, the packages "needs" an config-conversor
for change inetd.conf to their files in their postinstall, and another
to change back to inet.d on remove.

> It might be a better way to have a lintian warning if a package has a
> update-inetd call and no xinetd config or vis versa. Note that xinetd do
> not need the existence of a update-inetd tool ever. And other, newer
> inetd might be the same. Maybe there can be a dh_ tool for creating all
> needed inetd configurations.
> I think that all the stuff should allow to switch from whatever inetd to
> another without loosing configuration (coming from the package). And
> there is only two ways how you can do that:
> 1. Creating all needed configurations at build time
> 2. Having a single update-inetd which create ALL configurarions at
>    install time. But this make update-inetd package as dependency for
>    installation and NOT inet-superserver (the later can be suggestion as
>    well.)
> Gruß
>    Klaus

- --
er_maqui@darkbolt.net  ||  http://maqui.darkbolt.net
Linux registered user number: #363219
PGP key avaliable at KeyServ. KeyID: 0x4233E9F2
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Los hombres somos esclavos de la historia
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: