Tobias Weingartner wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, August 28, Jonathan Walther wrote:
> >
> > In that case, why don't we standardize on his daemontools and ucspi-tcp
> > package? It would one-up us over the NetBSD folks with their shiny
> > new "rc.d" toy, and everyone would love a setup that finally got rid
> > of inetd.conf for something more flexible and secure. I'd be willing
> > to modify apache to work with daemontools svc.
>
> Surely you jest?
...and don't call me surely :P (Could'nt resist;-))
Jonathan might be a fan of ucspi-tcp/daemontools, however I am not as
it never fitted well for my needs(ever!!). Talking about NetBSD rc.d,
I think someone already posted a work (derived from NetBSD) for
OpenBSD...check archives.
As for apache running under svc...umm I am not sure where you are
going with this? Apache does'nt run out of inetd in the core install
anyway (standalone daemon). Why add it to svc in the first place?
*Shudder*
Just to bring out a few fallacies from Dan's claims, postfix-users@
has a shit match going on discussing which mailer has better
performance [Thread : Postfix vs. qmail benchmark here]. Let me a
quote from an email:
"..That's not the only of Dan's documents which is out of date, I have
more than once asked Dan to update
http://cr.yp.to/maildisasters/postfix.html, but he never replied. All
of Dan's rightful sorrows about Postfix security have been addressed
1998-12-25, so Dan has not updated the document for more than 30
months. Can Dan's warnings about third-party software be taken
seriously? "Decide for yourself."..."
Ciao
--
Kevin Sindhu <kevin at tgivan dot com>
Systems Engineer
TGI Technologies Inc.
107 E 3rd Avenue
Vancouver, British Columbia V5T 1C7
Canada.
Tel: (604) 872-6676 Ext 321
Fax: (604) 872-6601
|