From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Jul 31 15: 9:18 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from axl.noc.iafrica.com (axl.noc.iafrica.com [196.31.1.175])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03A7014DCF
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 31 Jul 1999 15:09:11 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sheldonh@axl.noc.iafrica.com)
Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.noc.iafrica.com)
	by axl.noc.iafrica.com with local-esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1)
	id 11AhHN-000IJD-00; Sun, 01 Aug 1999 00:06:57 +0200
From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>
To: Doug <Doug@gorean.org>
Cc: Ben Rosengart <ben@skunk.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 30 Jul 1999 15:10:18 MST."
             <Pine.BSF.4.05.9907301505250.7396-100000@dt011n65.san.rr.com> 
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1999 00:06:57 +0200
Message-ID: <70382.933458817@axl.noc.iafrica.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG



On Fri, 30 Jul 1999 15:10:18 MST, Doug wrote:

> On some of the machines I administer I have some custom entries for
> /etc/services that make more sense than the defaults, especially for
> the ports > 1023.

Would you need these entries if inetd let you specify port numbers
instead of service names?

That behaviour is a function of laziness, rather than principle.  If I'm
correct in my suspicion that most people only meddle with /etc/services
to appease inetd's harvest of sown laziness, then the effort required to
change the current behaviour will be worthwhile.

Ciao,
Sheldon.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message