inetutils

Billy O'Connor billyoc at linuxfromscratch.org
Thu Oct 10 14:27:24 PDT 2002


Tushar T <tush at yahoo.com> writes:

> Dan Osterrath wrote:
> 
> >>I use it, eliminated syslog, netkit and whois on my system. Two less
> >>packages to maintain:)
> >>
> >Any other reasons? pro's and contra's needed
> >
> Mainly I moved becoz inetutils is better maintained and compiles
> cleanly on gcc3. Other than that I didn't see any difference in the
> system operation (and there shouldn't be). BTW, I don't use syslogd
> anymore, moved to metalog. The only con I see is that it doesn't have
> any /etc/services or /etc/protocols file but there is a hint which
> handles that (and is more complete anyways).
> 

Aren't there still some internal services missing from inetd?  I was
considering an inetutils BLFS section, but balked when I discovered
then the inetd that ships with inetutils had some missing internel
services.  Add to that the fact that we would be overwriting an inetd
that's installed with the base LFS system, which spooks me.

Billy
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list