On 8 June 1999, "Andrew Reilly" proclaimed: > Maybe 3.x users actually want tcpd too. I'm running -STABLE, and > qmail, and discovered that tcp_wrappers was somehow part of the > system when things started misbehaving. Oddly, tcpd itself is > _not_ built by the system, it seems.
This is correct; there is no need for it, as the support for the wrappers was built directly into inetd. Check the CVS logs for inetd. > The libwrap that is built > (or at least the man page for tcpdchk) seems to think that the > control files hosts.access and hosts.deny still live in > /usr/local/etc/, rather than where you would expect a system > component to put them: /etc. My tcpdchk doesn't seem to have this problem; then again, I'm running -CURRENT. Maybe you have a version left over from the ports? Try seeing what order your MANPATH is set or doing "man -d tcpdchk". > My current source of confusion is with the tcpd from ports, > which doesn't mention what level it is syslogging at: I can't > find any of it's log messages... I find that it's convenient to redirect all logging to a spare VT: --------[ /etc/syslogd.conf ]------------------------------------------- ... *.* /dev/ttyv7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ That always lets you see what's going on. -- Dom Mitchell -- Palmer & Harvey McLane -- Unix Systems Administrator "Always think very hard before messing with TCP. And then don't." -- MC -- ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. ********************************************************************** To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
