Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 16:17:11 -0500 (EST) From: Mike Fisher <mfisher@csh.rit.edu> To: Vivek Khera <khera@kciLink.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: question on necessity of tcp_wrappers port Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.20.0001101611450.372-100000@res112b-165.rh.rit.edu> In-Reply-To: <14458.5568.152019.715536@onceler.kcilink.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, Vivek Khera wrote:
> It seems to me that since 3.4 has tcp wrappers integrated into it
> (inetd has support built in, and libwrap is there) that the
> tcp_wrappers port is unnecessary. It really confused me when I did
> the install because the tcp_wrappers package was offered to be
> installed during the installation, and was not marked as "obsolete" in
> any way.
Unless I am in error, the functionality of the port's tcpd binary
(useful for logging) is not available from the FreeBSD version of
tcp_wrappers.
- --
Mike
"The man who puts all the guns and all the decision-making power
into the hands of the central government and then says, 'Limit
yourself'; it is he who is truly the impractical utopian."
-- Murray Rothbard
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0i
Comment:
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBOHpMWOG+Jfm/z6tNEQIlGACeIGuLzYSZk6M0bSQLD1Fe1p4iNAkAoJD1
/2wJEquAgnk9Xu+Os/cM8uwG
=gpK+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.20.0001101611450.372-100000>