Hello!
It's seemed strange to me -- there are many different implementations
of some utilities around. Examples:
gnu inetutils
ftp/ftpd, inetd, rsh&co, syslogd, talk/talkd, telnet/telnetd, tftp/tftpd, whois
netkit-base -- possible dead (?), now split in redhat
inetd, ping, telnet/telnetd, etc
net-tools
ifconfig, arp, route, *name, etc
traceroute
iproute
with replacements of tools from net-tools (just one `ip' command for all)
iputils
ping6, traceroute6, ...
sysklogd
klogd, syslogd
xinetd
with replacement for inetd
wu-ftpd, proftpd, beroftpd, ncftpd etc...
etc...
All this packages made with different goals. For example, `ip' from iproute
package will never use hostnames, just ip addresses, but other (from net-tools)
use hostnames massively.
Looking to all this, I hope that some time all this "menagerie" will be merged into
one package (like netkit-base was, or like inetutils is), so that all utilities will
be consistent with each other.... Just a hope?..
But here is a guestion. Does anybody knows any comparisions for, e.g. syslogds in
inetutils, sysklogd, and *bsd sources? The same for inetd from
iputils/netkit-base/*BSD?
Why, for example, redhat chooses to use netkit-base instead of gnu inetutils?
(one little example of that I asking -- syslogd in redhat distro (from sysklogd) seemed
to be very resource-gluttonous when some app uses it heavily, but this is not true
for FreeBSD, for example. I looked to this from mail server's view - messages will
pass
much faster when i add `-' before /var/log/maillog in syslogd.conf in linux, this is
already fast enouth on FBSD).
And another one. Does anybody knows some place for discussion about such a things like
"how should be done some common utility"? I maybe can maintain this set of utils,
but this will be the Right Thing(tm) to _me_, probably not to others...
Regards,
Michael.
--
To unsubscribe:
mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
