This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [ITP] tftp-hpa 5.0
Hi there!
Am 04.10.2010 17:24, schrieb Charles Wilson:
Hmmm...now that I think about it, it would be really great if the
package name(s) themselves were simply tftp-5.0-N tftp-server-5.0-N
Users aren't going to CARE that the implementation/source came from
the 'tftp-hpa' distribution.
Ic. I'm not that of a Cygwin expert so I just trust your opinion here.
Changing the package accordingly is fine for me. (Keeping inetutils'
tftp implementation was just a quick idea w/o thinking about the
conflict resolving stuff).
OK. My revised package does this.
Ok, so I'll wait for your update...
And that's great; obviously your internal team can continue to use what
you have, until the revised version comes along. In fact, it's great
that you have an in-place testing environment; we can easily make sure
that the revised versions don't break anything.
... and try to push it into our product's mainline which should be well
possible in the next weeks. However, please note that we don't use IPv6
and have no testbed for this.
That makes sense. However, as we/I are *very* enthusiastic about
deleting inetutils' tftp in favor of tftp-hpa, now's the time to make
that investment.
:-) Let me know when I can help.
That's the reason why I didn't spend any effort on this yet and why I
personally don't see this as a top-prio.
Well, it should Just Work(tm); tcp_wrappers does all the heavy lifting.
We'll see.
Yes, I'll have a look on it as soon as I receive your update.
Well, that's true of most insecure services. However, tftp-hpa DOES
drop privileges (assuming we un-#ifdef-out that stuff), so it NEEDS an
unprivileged user to change to. Since windows doesn't have a default
'nobody' user (other than Guest, and often that account is disabled
entirely), we need a script to create one. Even if it doesn't install
the service.
Convinced.
--
Gernot