Re: inetd's status in Debian
Roger Leigh writes ("Re: inetd's status in Debian"):
> The fact that update-inetd directly updates inetd.conf and inetd.conf
Since this was my fault, I would just like to apologise again.
> I did propose we switch to inetd-using packages providing a
> config file fragment in e.g. /etc/inetd.d, and having update-inetd
> simply regenerate inetd.conf from these pieces (and it would
> be trivial for it to preserve user edits with this mechanism),
> and it would also be idempotent. It has the benefits of simplicity
> and robustness, since it doesn't require calling a postinst script
> to run update-inetd with a specific (and limited) set of options.
> The current approach relies of update-inetd being hugely complex,
> when it really doesn't need to be.