From owner-freebsd-current Tue Jun 8 7:35:51 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from misha.cisco.com (misha.cisco.com [171.69.206.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2378E14D86 for ; Tue, 8 Jun 1999 07:35:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mi@misha.cisco.com) Received: (from mi@localhost) by misha.cisco.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id KAA78215 for current@freebsd.org; Tue, 8 Jun 1999 10:35:07 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mi) Message-Id: <199906081435.KAA78215@misha.cisco.com> Subject: Re: tcp_wrapper in contrib and ports? In-Reply-To: from Dom Mitchell at "Jun 8, 1999 09:41:35 am" To: current@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 10:35:07 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: mi@aldan.algebra.com From: Mikhail Teterin X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL52 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Dom Mitchell once wrote: > This is correct; there is no need for it, as the support for the > wrappers was built directly into inetd. Check the CVS logs for inetd. Are not there any other uses for it? Like "xinetd"? If everything else (the libwrap, the man pages) is there, why not install the tcpd as well? -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message