Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 10/28/05 14:29 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>>But then, this would be no different than the inetutils instructions.
> 
> OK, I think I see what is meant.  I'm not sure what you mean with your
> reference to inetutils, but BIND Utils and BIND are two sets of install
> instructions for the same package.

Inetutils, like NTP installs servers and client in the same set of
instructions. And both packages are only located in the "Basic Networking
Programs" section.

> The difference I see here is that a user would always install all the
> executables.  That's the way ntp works.

That's also the way CVS, SVN, Samba and probably others are as well.
All of the executables are installed, it is just configuration
differences which separate the server and the client instructions.

I should probably not contribute to this thread any longer, because
I was just guessing as to what Archaic's intentions were. We may
be discussing something off-topic as to what he was saying.

-- 
Randy

rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686]
14:32:00 up 33 days, 22:56, 3 users, load average: 0.10, 0.14, 0.42
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to