Curt Sampson writes:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 1998, Ted Lemon wrote:
> 
> > Hm.   That's a bit ugly.   Is there any particular reason why syslogd
> > can't start without -s?   I.e., does it fail, and if so, how?   It
> > probably shouldn't fail.
> 
> Well, at that time there are no network interfaces active. If it
> will automatically start to listen on new network interfaces as
> they're configured, perhaps we can just start it with the standard
> arguments.

It won't. We need to fix that, though.

Perry