| 1 |
* Alexander Skwar <listen@×××××××××××××××.name> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Enrico Weigelt wrote: |
| 3 |
> >* Bruno Lustosa <bruno.lists@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> ><snip> |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> >>anyway, why use old inetd at all? xinetd is way more powerful and secure! |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> >well, I've already been using it for over 10 years, I never had |
| 10 |
> >serious problems with it, and has all I need. |
| 11 |
> >So why should I now switch to xinetd ? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> It's more modern. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Ah. Interesting argument. |
| 16 |
Because it's quite modern (for the kids) to wear overwide pants, |
| 17 |
there's no need to produce tight ones anylonger ? |
| 18 |
Great. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> >Wouldn't it make more sense to let "inetd" be an virtual package |
| 21 |
> >which can be configured by some useflag to get either classic inetd |
| 22 |
> >or xinet in, maybe xinet as default ? |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Why? The current way is quite fine, IMO. You can easily select |
| 25 |
> which package to install, why depend on some USE flag? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Following you line of argumentation, the virtual package "inetd" |
| 28 |
should be dropped, since people can directly choose "xinetd". |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
cu |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 34 |
Enrico Weigelt == metux IT service |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
phone: +49 36207 519931 www: http://www.metux.de/ |
| 37 |
fax: +49 36207 519932 email: contact@×××××.de |
| 38 |
cellphone: +49 174 7066481 |
| 39 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 40 |
-- DSL ab 0 Euro. -- statische IP -- UUCP -- Hosting -- Webshops -- |
| 41 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives