From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Aug 2 7:37:34 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [209.157.86.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DE7315146; Mon, 2 Aug 1999 07:37:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id HAA12920; Mon, 2 Aug 1999 07:36:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 07:36:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <199908021436.HAA12920@apollo.backplane.com> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: John-Mark Gurney , Sheldon Hearn , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services References: <70382.933458817@axl.noc.iafrica.com> <19990731161854.11826@hydrogen.fircrest.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :John-Mark Gurney writes: :> Sheldon Hearn scribbled this message on Aug 1: :> > Would you need these entries if inetd let you specify port numbers :> > instead of service names? :> I vote for allowing inetd.conf to specify a port number instead of a :> service name... it should be very easy to make the modification, and :> I'm willing to do all the work, assuming no one on -committers objects.. : :The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts :port numbers. : :DES :-- :Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no If we were to depend on this, it would break code compatibility with other UNIXes for no good reason. For example, someone porting inetd from FreeBSD to something else would not get a compatible result without undoing the 'fix'. 'Fixing' getservbyname() is a really bad idea. -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message