Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 03:05:54 -0600 (MDT) From: freebsd@XtremeDev.com To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: conf/22271: /usr/src/UPDATING does not reflect /etc/defaults/rc.conf Message-ID: <20001024090554.CACA05BAD@mail.XtremeDev.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Number: 22271
>Category: conf
>Synopsis: /usr/src/UPDATING does not reflect /etc/defaults/rc.conf
>Confidential: no
>Severity: serious
>Priority: medium
>Responsible: freebsd-bugs
>State: open
>Quarter:
>Keywords:
>Date-Required:
>Class: doc-bug
>Submitter-Id: current-users
>Arrival-Date: Tue Oct 24 02:10:03 PDT 2000
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator: FreeBSD
>Release: FreeBSD 4.1.1-STABLE i386
>Organization:
>Environment:
FreeBSD 4.1.1-STABLE
>Description:
/usr/src/UPDATING has:
20000907:
Networking defaults have been tightened. Anybody upgrading
/etc/defaults/rc.conf needs to add the following lines to
/etc/rc.conf if they want to have the same setup
afterwards (unless the variables already are set, of course):
# Enable network daemons for user convenience.
inetd_enable="YES"
portmap_enable="YES"
sendmail_enable="YES"
And yet /etc/defaults/rc.conf still lists inetd_enable, portmap_enable, and sendmail_enable as "YES". It would appear an MFC never happened, and networking defaults was never "tightened." Should either UPDATING or /etc/defaults/rc.conf be changed before 4.2-RELEASE?
>How-To-Repeat:
A few lines down in /usr/src/UPDATING, and a simple grep of /etc/defaults/rc.conf will confirm.
>Fix:
Either change the relavant lines in /etc/defaults/rc.conf to "NO", or add an entry to /usr/src/UPDATING indicating the network defaults was actually never changed.
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted:
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001024090554.CACA05BAD>