On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 22:11 -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> Is there a movement to get rid of xinetd? It's just that I remember
> that the trend used to be to move more server processes to be added to
> the inetd config.
As I recall, the trend was to move away from it, with individual scripts
per se
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 11:21:28AM -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > You should file bug reports if that's the case.
>
> Well, in the git-daemon case, I'm now one of the maintainers. So I
> can more easily fix the problem directly. ;)
>
> I think there are some valid reaso
On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Mike Burger wrote:
>> On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Mike Burger wrote:
On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Mike Burger wrote:
>> I just noticed that my F10 system does not even have xinetd
>> installed.
>> I
>> can certainly install it if I want, but I was just suprised t
> On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Mike Burger wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Mike Burger wrote:
> I just noticed that my F10 system does not even have xinetd
> installed.
> I
> can certainly install it if I want, but I was just suprised that it
> was
> not installed by default.
On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Mike Burger wrote:
>> On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Mike Burger wrote:
I just noticed that my F10 system does not even have xinetd installed.
I
can certainly install it if I want, but I was just suprised that it was
not installed by default. Is there a movement
On 05/26/2009 07:47 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> Markku Kolkka wrote:
>> A program that can run either as a stand-alone daemon or under
>> xinetd doesn't _require_ xinetd.
>
> Sure. But some of the packages are being setup to xinetd by default,
> and it can be a pain to find that you install it an
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> You should file bug reports if that's the case.
Well, in the git-daemon case, I'm now one of the maintainers. So I
can more easily fix the problem directly. ;)
I think there are some valid reasons for packages to drop files into
/etc/xinet.d and not require xinetd, but wh
Markku Kolkka wrote:
> A program that can run either as a stand-alone daemon or under
> xinetd doesn't _require_ xinetd.
Sure. But some of the packages are being setup to xinetd by default,
and it can be a pain to find that you install it and it does not work
by default.
Take git-daemon for exam
Todd Zullinger kirjoitti viestissään (lähetysaika tiistai, 26.
toukokuuta 2009):
> It seems that about half of the packages that place files in
> /etc/xinetd.d require xinetd and half do not. I'm not sure
> why that is in many cases.
A program that can run either as a stand-alone daemon or under
Paul W. Frields wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 08:58:04AM -0400, Mike Burger wrote:
[...]
>> But, as noted, if Amanda was not selected at install time, like
>> telnet server, etc., Anaconda would not have grabbed xinetd for
>> installation.
>
> The amanda package requires xinetd:
>
> $ repoquery
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 08:58:04AM -0400, Mike Burger wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Mike Burger wrote:
> >>> I just noticed that my F10 system does not even have xinetd installed.
> >>> I
> >>> can certainly install it if I want, but I was just suprised that it was
> >>> not installed by de
> On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Mike Burger wrote:
>>> I just noticed that my F10 system does not even have xinetd installed.
>>> I
>>> can certainly install it if I want, but I was just suprised that it was
>>> not installed by default. Is there a movement to get rid of xinetd?
>>> It's
>>> just that I
On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Mike Burger wrote:
>> I just noticed that my F10 system does not even have xinetd installed. I
>> can certainly install it if I want, but I was just suprised that it was
>> not installed by default. Is there a movement to get rid of xinetd? It's
>> just that I remember that
> I just noticed that my F10 system does not even have xinetd installed. I
> can certainly install it if I want, but I was just suprised that it was
> not installed by default. Is there a movement to get rid of xinetd? It's
> just that I remember that the trend used to be to move more server
> proc
I just noticed that my F10 system does not even have xinetd installed. I
can certainly install it if I want, but I was just suprised that it was
not installed by default. Is there a movement to get rid of xinetd? It's
just that I remember that the trend used to be to move more server
processes
15 matches
Mail list logo
