Eric Cooper <e...@cmu.edu> writes: > Regarding the other thread in -devel about the future of inetd: in my > case I found it very sensible to jettison all the code for opening > sockets, binding ports, handling IPv6, handling tcp-wrappers, > daemonizing processes, etc. and punt it to inetd. Since apt clients > keep their connections open for many multiple, the performance hit is > negligible.
Yeah, I disagree with the idea that inetd is a bad choice for new programs. Writing a standalone daemon requires a fair bit of networking knowledge and work, particularly if you also want to support IPv6, and inetd can already do all that for you. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
