Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 00:27:40 -0700 From: bmah@FreeBSD.org (Bruce A. Mah) To: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@mahoroba.org> Cc: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org>, bmah@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: etc mfc Message-ID: <200204200727.g3K7ReLt046219@intruder.bmah.org> In-Reply-To: <yge3cxru4n8.wl@mille.mahoroba.org> References: <ygen0w2tdpm.wl@mille.mahoroba.org> <20020417124043.K4228-100000@master.gorean.org> <yge3cxru4n8.wl@mille.mahoroba.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
If memory serves me right, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote: > DougB> That depends on your perspective on this I suppose... My reason > ing > DougB> at the time was that since all entries in inetd.conf are commented out > by > DougB> default, turning the daemon on by default is silly. Also, users who > DougB> actually want inetd for something will likely have entries in > DougB> /etc/rc.conf[.local] either by design, or via sysinstall. However, if > you > DougB> believe strongly that the default should continue to be YES, my feelin > gs > DougB> won't be hurt if you change it. > > I myself doesn't have strong objection about changing it. However, I > believe that /etc/rc.conf(.local) of not few poeple doesn't have > inetd_enable=YES. So, this change should be described in UPDATING and > relnotes. I would strongly like to see the inetd_enable change backed out. Ultimately, having inetd disabled by default is a Good Thing (TM), but doing the change in the middle of the 4-STABLE train will cause (and is causing) too much disruption. In my opinion, the badness outweighs the goodness. In any case, I will make the necessary entries for the release notes. (Apparently, I haven't yet documented this change for -CURRENT, either.) Bruce. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200204200727.g3K7ReLt046219>