From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jan 9 17:42:38 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA07379 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:42:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from wcc.wcc.net (wcc.wcc.net [208.6.232.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA07370 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:42:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from piquan@wcc.wcc.net) Received: from detlev.UUCP (ppp123.wcc.net [208.6.232.123]) by wcc.wcc.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA23709; Fri, 9 Jan 1998 19:39:17 -0600 (CST) Received: (from joelh@localhost) by detlev.UUCP (8.8.8/8.8.7) id TAA23025; Fri, 9 Jan 1998 19:42:28 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from joelh) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 19:42:28 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199801100142.TAA23025@detlev.UUCP> To: sthaug@nethelp.no CC: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: <28067.884362225@verdi.nethelp.no> (sthaug@nethelp.no) Subject: Re: Adding process ID listing to netstat From: Joel Ray Holveck Reply-to: joelh@gnu.org References: <199801090654.AAA15353@detlev.UUCP> <28067.884362225@verdi.nethelp.no> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk >> Would it be useful to others to allow netstat to give the process ID's >> that are using sockets? > Yes - but aren't you reimplementing lsof? Would it be a good idea to add > lsof to the base system instead, like top was added? I'm not familiar with 'lsof'. I'll have to check it out. I just hacked it last night when I didn't know what a couple of ports were being used for, gdb'd my way into finding the stucture, and decided I didn't ever want to do that again. Cheers, joelh -- Joel Ray Holveck - joelh@gnu.org - http://www.wp.com/piquan Fourth law of programming: Anything that can go wrong wi sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped