Package: tftpd-hpa
Version: 5.0-18
Severity: normal

I was running tftpd-hpa from inetd and dhcpd3 as a standalone server on Lenny. 
While
upgrading to Squeeze today I encountered that 5.x versions of tftpd-hpa would 
like
to bind to 0.0.0.0:69 and run as a standalone daemon. This conflicts with the 
already
running dhcpd3 on my box. Syslog states:

  cannot bind to local IPv4 socket: Address already in use

It might be my fault to not see the solution, so please point me to it if 
there's one
available.

Setting up a seperate IP address for tftpd-hpa could be a solution, but as I'm 
using
tftpd-hpa 2 times a year, it makes no great sense in having a) the daemon 
running at
all times and b) provide a separate IP address for this circumstances (though 
there
would be plenty available, for sure).

So, I would like to let the daemon run from x?inetd again, or see an easy way 
of getting
dhcpd3 and tftpd-hpa to work together on Squeeze.

Regards,

Robert Kehl

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 6.0
  APT prefers stable
  APT policy: (990, 'stable'), (501, 'testing'), (450, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-2-686 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

Versions of packages tftpd-hpa depends on:
ii  adduser                       3.112+nmu2 add and remove users and groups
ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]         1.5.36.1   Debian configuration management sy
ii  libc6                         2.11.2-10  Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib
ii  libwrap0                      7.6.q-19   Wietse Venema's TCP wrappers libra

tftpd-hpa recommends no packages.

Versions of packages tftpd-hpa suggests:
ii  syslinux-common            2:4.02+dfsg-7 collection of boot loaders (common

-- debconf information:
  tftpd-hpa/address:
* tftpd-hpa/directory:
  tftpd-hpa/username:
  tftpd-hpa/options: --secure
  tftpd-hpa/use_inetd: true



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]

Reply via email to