From owner-freebsd-ports  Tue Aug  5 14:31:22 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA06208
          for ports-outgoing; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:31:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA06202;
          Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:31:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.6/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA11827; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:30:01 -0700 (PDT)
To: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>
cc: torstenb@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Major bogon in tcp_wrappers port. 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 05 Aug 1997 20:16:55 +0200."
             <199708051816.UAA15581@greenpeace.grondar.za> 
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 14:30:01 -0700
Message-ID: <11823.870816601@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> <asbestos>
> 
> _*PRETTY_PLEASE*_ cant we bring this into the "core" FreeBSD?
> 
> With all the squeling about security, IMHO it is silly not to.
> 
> </asbestos>

Only if it's extended to use TCL in some way.

Ha ha.  Just kidding.  Actually, it does sort of make sense given that
many other OSes ship tcpd along with an inetd.conf configured to use
it by default, but I'm past the point where I'm going to argue for
bringing _anything_ into the base OS so I'll let you fight this battle
by yourself, naked and alone. ;-)

				Jordan