From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Aug 24 9: 2: 6 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from topperwein.dyndns.org (acs-24-154-5-249.zoominternet.net [24.154.5.249]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 943A337B424 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 09:02:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by topperwein.dyndns.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA09248; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:01:24 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from behanna@zbzoom.net) Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:01:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Chris BeHanna Reply-To: behanna@zbzoom.net To: Neil Blakey-Milner Cc: Francisco Reyes , FreeBSD Stable List Subject: Re: Upcoming rc.conf changes not loading certain currently loaded daemons In-Reply-To: <20000824150715.A24874@mithrandr.moria.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 24 Aug 2000, Neil Blakey-Milner wrote: > On Thu 2000-08-24 (01:03), Francisco Reyes wrote: > > What was the reason for these daemons been set to not start? > > Wouldn't this "break" working machines? > > Only if you upgrade without reading the heads-up and warnings in > UPDATING. > > The reason was to make things more obvious. If you have an empty > /etc/rc.conf, you don't expect portmap and inetd to be running. > > (and when I'm through with it, sendmail won't be listening on port 25 by > default either *evil.grin*) Won't that break things, though? Doesn't every other MTA in the world expect to send its SMTP traffic over port 25? If the answer is "no," then I'm very excited, because my ISP blocks ports 1-1024. -- Chris BeHanna Software Engineer (at yourfit.com) behanna@zbzoom.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message