If the guilty party of this thread can put forth another $.00001, I just
wanted to point out my frustration in trying to determine why amanda was
having this problem with inetd. I had honestly forgotten about the tcp
wrapper part, and it didn't occur to me how inetd/amanda would react if
there wasn't an entry in the hosts.allow file. Considering that amandad
is udp based instead of tcp, I now understand how the amandad would behave
through inetd, i.e. server sends requests, client inetd spawns amandad,
but in my case, amandad refuses, and then inetd tries to start it up
numerous times but amandad cancels it, causing inetd to fail. It was that
behavior that I wasn't expecting, and didn't see anything in the archives
matching that -- though I didn't look into other possible causes, which
I'll take the blame for.
I agree with both points on this one.
Doug
ps - Just want to say thanks to the Amanda developers for their great
product!
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> >FAQ...". We all categorise things differently to each other so what
> >might seem like a sensible place for a question to you, may not be
> >sensible to the next person...
>
> Well the web should be a very flexible tool for offering multiple
> indexation of a FAQ. Or have a search on contents tool :)
>
> Olivier
>
