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

Re: daemon/initd



On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 04:08:44PM +1000, Marc-Adrian Napoli wrote:
> Hey Seth. :)
> 
> Just a quick question..
> 
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 03:13:12PM +1300, zdrysdal@diagnostic.co.nz wrote:
> > > Can someone properly explain to me the differences between how a process
> > > starts up as a daemon as apposed to a process which starts up via initd
> as
> > > i am a little unsure.
> >
> > Well, programs that init starts normally ARE daemons.
> 
> Seeing as how everyone complains about inetd - why isn't it replaced?
> 
> The "tcpserver" that qmail uses is quite steady, will inetd ever be
> replaced?

Well, if you want to, you can replace it with xinetd. Its config files are
different. But.. I hear it has more options. One commonly used extension to
inetd is tcpwrappers. This helps quite a bit... 

(heh, debian's unstable has at least two replacements for inetd:
$ apt-cache search xinetd
rlinetd - gruesomely over-featured inetd replacement
xinetd - replacement for inetd with many enhancements

There is also this thingy:
rinetd - Internet redirection server

I don't know if it can replace inetd or not.. 

So, the toys exist to replace inetd already, if you want. For me,
tcpwrappers with inetd is enough. <shrug>

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Marc-Adrian Napoli
> Connect Infobahn Australia
> +61 2 92811750
> 
> 
> -- 
> Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org < /dev/null

-- 
Seth Arnold | http://www.willamette.edu/~sarnold/
Hate spam? See http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ for help
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into
your ~/.signature to help me spread!


Reply to: