Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:33:28 +0200 From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com>, Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Small, useful tools (Was: Re: 'cpdup' program, and question) Message-ID: <199901261933.VAA50713@greenpeace.grondar.za> In-Reply-To: Your message of " Tue, 26 Jan 1999 11:22:21 PST." <199901261922.LAA20798@apollo.backplane.com> References: <27224.917376396@critter.freebsd.dk> <199901261912.VAA50572@greenpeace.grondar.za> <199901261922.LAA20798@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Dillon wrote: > I don't mind tcp-wrappers being included with the system, but I will > fight tooth and nail if someone actually tries to make tcp-wrappers > a run-time element of the standard FreeBSD distribution. What do you mean by that? If the OOB sendmail is linked against libwrap but the default config files cause sendmail to behave exactly as it does without wrappers, is that OK? Or do you object to it being linked against libwrap in the first place? As far as inetd is concerned (with the current inetd/tcpd model) that folks will wish to choose, and so propose that the default inetd.conf has entries for wrapped daemons in addition to unwrapped (commented out, of course) for reference. OOB config file should have a <expletive>-load of examples with POLA-type defaults. M -- Mark Murray Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org 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?199901261933.VAA50713>