Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 25 Jun 1999 09:31:26 -0400
From:      Keith Stevenson <k.stevenson@louisville.edu>
To:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Inetd and wrapping.
Message-ID:  <19990625093126.D23508@homer.louisville.edu>
In-Reply-To: <11764.930315034@axl.noc.iafrica.com>; from Sheldon Hearn on Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 02:50:34PM %2B0200
References:  <199906251244.FAA30357@sigma.veritas.com> <11764.930315034@axl.noc.iafrica.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 02:50:34PM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 25 Jun 1999 05:44:06 MST, Aaron Smith wrote:
> 
> > could you please restate the argument for this? i still haven't heard a
> > decent reason for this sort of conf format perturbation.
> 
> I'm so tempted to say "me too". :-)
> 
> John Baldwin has suggested that he had functionality with inetd + tcpd
> that he doesn't have any more with inetd + libwrap.

As much as I appreciate the work that has gone into adding this feature to
inetd, I'm starting to wonder if it is causing more harm than good.  One of the
things I good-naturedly complain about to my Linux-using friends is the 
large number of seemingly gratuitous changes which make Linux different that
other similar operating systems.  As well-intentioned as adding libwrap support
to inetd was, I'm having trouble finding a justification for the change.  What
is possible now that wasn't possible with tcpd from the ports collection?  Why
incorporate libwrap (and make our inetd functionally different from everyone
else's) instead of bringing tcpd into the base system?

I realize that I'm more than a bit late in raising these issues.  I didn't
even realize that libwrap had been added to inetd until Mark Murray told me at
USENIX.  (Somehow I missed all of the announcements.)  Assuming that it is too
late to undo the changes to inetd, I'd like to urge that we not also start
tinkering with the format of inetd.conf.  I'm just not comfortable with
creating "FreeBSD-isms" when there isn't a clear improvement in functionality.

Regards,
--Keith Stevenson--

-- 
Keith Stevenson
System Programmer - Data Center Services - University of Louisville
k.stevenson@louisville.edu
PGP key fingerprint =  4B 29 A8 95 A8 82 EA A2  29 CE 68 DE FC EE B6 A0


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990625093126.D23508>