Re: xinetd diversions and questions

["Adam P. Harris" <apharris@onshore.com>]

[You (Adam Heath)]
>A while back I started maintaining xinetd for Boris, as his internet
>connection isn't the best right now.  I have given some thought on how to
>handle the entire /etc/init.d/{netbase,xinetd} issue.
>
>The best way, I think, instead of mucking with netbase, is to use a diversion
>on /usr/sbin/inetd.  This way, if portmap ever changes names again, there
>should be any problems.  Eventually, I will write a update-inetd that will
>know about xinetd, and divert that also.

I agree that diversion are the way to go.  I'm not sure what would happen,
however, if you diverted inetd w/o diverting update-inetd.  Is that going 
to cause a lot of problems?  Perhaps if you don't have time to do it, you 
could look for volunteers?

At the *very* least, you should divert update-inetd with a script that
says "You will have to manually add lines for the daemon XXXX to /etc/
xinetd.conf (or whatever) until this script is complete.  Press return 
to continue."

.....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org