Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 22:15:28 -0800 (PST) From: Tom Samplonius <tom@uniserve.com> To: Nathan Lawson <nlawson@statler.csc.calpoly.edu> Cc: security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ownership of files/tcp_wrappers port Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960122221256.811B-100000@haven.uniserve.com> In-Reply-To: <199601222147.NAA09887@statler.csc.calpoly.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 22 Jan 1996, Nathan Lawson wrote: > Secondly, I was wondering why the tcp_wrappers distribution didn't make it > into the source tree instead of being a port. It's a pretty small program > that hasn't received too many changes recently. It's very worthwhile and > libwrap.a can be linked into portmap and ypserv a lot more easily (even > making this the default, perhaps). Personally, I've always considered xinetd to the be the superior solution to the access control problem, since it doesn't incur the extra overhead of a fork+exec for every connection. Tom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.960122221256.811B-100000>