From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Brian J. Murrell" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.4/2.5] Date: 30 Jun 2003 08:42:10 -0400 Sender: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <1056976930.5553.26.camel@pc> References: <1056913883.1068.70.camel@exile> <1056915465.9614.59.camel@pc> <1056918054.1068.96.camel@exile> <1056918710.23456.80.camel@pc> <20030630120556.GI2645@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-1bKzsejE9ccZvcXoSzlG" Return-path: To: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org In-Reply-To: <20030630120556.GI2645@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> Errors-To: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org --=-1bKzsejE9ccZvcXoSzlG Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2003-06-30 at 08:05, Harald Welte wrote: >=20 > I don't really see the need for such a patch unless the port numbers > used by amanda can be tuned somehow (by an amanda server/client config > file). I'm not that familiar with the amanda suite, could somebody > please investicate this? The port numbers can certainly be tuned. In the case of the client (which having configurable ports as per Filip's patch addresses) the client is simply started from the [x]inetd super-server, so it can be on any port the admin wishes. b. --=20 Brian J. Murrell --=-1bKzsejE9ccZvcXoSzlG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA/ADAil3EQlGLyuXARAuShAJ9tw1NBSFn8HXMa7TMNiJcMTRftagCfaWJg Nj0lPcM2nuNM5hxbsajFOXs= =3+nf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-1bKzsejE9ccZvcXoSzlG--