r8950 - in trunk/BOOK: . book general/sysutils introduction/important introduction/welcome networking/netprogs postlfs/config postlfs/security

Bruce Dubbs bruce.dubbs at gmail.com
Wed Nov 9 13:01:13 PST 2011

DJ Lucas wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I understand your concern, but is there anything that either nis of
>> nfs
>> offers that we can't get via other packages?  Samba can certainly 
>> replace the nfs functionality.  I don't know of anyone who uses nis
>> any
>> more, although I suspect there are some who use it just out of
>> habit.
> Out of habit, IDK...but being able to use it out of the box without
> installing anything else on a base LFS seems somewhat compelling to
> me. Please note that I do not do this myself, just playing devil's
> advocate here. It just seems a little bit silly to ditch those
> packages completely when it is a relatively easy fix. 

I guess I'm in a mood to drop packages when justified.  In this case, we 
don't have a 'stable' upstream and there is a good alternative package.

> Maybe just add
> a note and point to wiki instructions if nothing else until upstream
> blesses us with a working solution. 

A note in the wiki would be OK, but I don't know where to put it with 
the packages removed.  If you want to write something up to put in 
"Other Networking Programs", we could do that.

> Of course, we no longer have to keep {,x}inetd instructions in mind
> when configuring a package. Couple of boot scripts might have to be
> added, swat w/ stunnel for instance.

I'm not sure I understand where this came from.  I don't particularly 
like {,x}inetd, but I wasn't going to drop them.  However you are right 
about adding a boot script.  Basically, I think the only thing needed is:

stunnel -p /etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem -d 901 -l /usr/bin/swat swat

I'll try that when I get to samba.  I'm working on prereqs for samba now.

   -- Bruce

More information about the blfs-book mailing list