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

Re: inetd's status in Debian

Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 08:06:16PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:

>> I'm wondering if making super servers become optionnal wouldn't be a worthy
>> goal for squeeze.
> Why?  If it ain't broke, don't fix it.  Having a superserver installed isn't
> broken.  Why should every daemon have to implement connection handling when
> they can offload that to the inetd?
> Demoting inetd from standard to optional seems to me like a reasonable
> release goal; that doesn't require patching lots of upstream code that works
> just fine the way it is already.  In fact, AFAICS it doesn't require
> patching any of our packages.

Right, isn't that the proposal: demote inetd and update-inetd to

Btw, lots of packages are depending on update-inetd while it's
guaranteed to be available when depending on inet-superserver.



Reply to: