Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 05:49:10 -0500 From: Brian T.Schellenberger <bts@babbleon.org> To: Christopher Schulte <schulte+freebsd@nospam.schulte.org>, "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1011455737.3e0c77@mired.org> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: lsof vs. fstat Message-ID: <0a1123649100f12FE6@Mail6.nc.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020114101809.04018490@pop3s.schulte.org> References: <71952277@toto.iv> <5.1.0.14.0.20020114101809.04018490@pop3s.schulte.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 14 January 2002 11:21 am, Christopher Schulte wrote:
>
> Use lsof ( /usr/ports/sysutils/lsof ) and HUP only the listening sshd
> process.
Does lsof have some advantage over fstat? I posted a while ago mentioning
lsof, which had been recomemnded to me by regular FreeBSD users, and somebody
here pointed out that fstat is in the base system. It seems to do what I
used lsof for, so I just aliased lsof to fstat when I restaged my machine
recently.
Am I missing out on something or is fstat just not well-known?
>
> --chris
--
Brian T. Schellenberger . . . . . . . bts@wnt.sas.com (work)
Brian, the man from Babble-On . . . . bts@babbleon.org (personal)
http://www.babbleon.org
-------> Free Dmitry Sklyarov! (let him go home) <-----------
http://www.eff.org http://www.programming-freedom.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0a1123649100f12FE6>