From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jan 6 01:39:52 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id BAA23182 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 01:39:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from deputy.pavilion.co.uk (deputy.pavilion.co.uk [194.242.128.24]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id BAA23177 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 01:39:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from c493.tgb.toyota.co.uk (tgb-isd.demon.co.uk [194.222.88.26]) by deputy.pavilion.co.uk (8.7/8.7) with SMTP id JAA24767; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:38:30 GMT Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:38:30 GMT Message-Id: <199701060938.JAA24767@deputy.pavilion.co.uk> X-Sender: aledm@mailhost.pavilion.co.uk (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Jaye Mathisen , hackers@freebsd.org From: Aled Morris Subject: Re: Any good reason to run portmap on a non NFS'd/RPC'd machine? Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 14:55 02/01/97 -0800, Jaye Mathisen wrote: >I'm not using YP or any of that stuff. If not, then it seems like >something that would be good to turn into a sysconfig variable. Nor do I - I usually rename "portmap" so it doesn't get found by RC. I would support the proposal for a sysconfig variable (although to avoid beginner's problems, there should probably be some logic in RC to override "portmap=NO" if YP, NFS or any other good stuff is enabled.) Aled -- telephone +44 973 207987 O-