Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=566757 --- Comment #9 from Bill Nottingham <[email protected]> 2010-04-28 15:29:18 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > well, they both use /etc/ipsec.d, /etc/ipsec.conf and /etc/ipsec.secrets, both > provide /usr/sbin/ipsec and both provide a daemon named pluto that binds to > the > same port to name a few. > > it would basically mean renaming almost everything to make it non-conflicting > and tbh i don't much see the point of having both openswan and strongswan on > the same machine. Right, the point being is if there's 90-95% feature overlap, why couldn't the missing feature just be added into openswan, to save effort and confusion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
