Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 10:12:33 -0400 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: Denis Peplin <den@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: TCP Wrappers section (handbook/security): services is not daemons Message-ID: <20041014101233.399d4b40@localhost> In-Reply-To: <416E8491.8080500@FreeBSD.org> References: <416E4DFD.3040203@FreeBSD.org> <20041014102459.GD799@zaphod.nitro.dk> <20041014092213.22d6914d@localhost> <416E8491.8080500@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:52:17 +0400 Denis Peplin <den@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > Hello! > > Yes, i see now that using word "daemon" for services is > tradition here :) > > It will not be a big problem, if we will add short > description for this "term" (explain tradition) in > beginning of the section. We can do that, but I do see one slight problem: Should you write a patch or should I? I'm kind of in the middle of a move and a new job so my FreeBSD time is pretty short. :) -- Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041014101233.399d4b40>