From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jun 22 1:18: 3 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 B915314D4F; Tue, 22 Jun 1999 01:17:48 -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 10wLkD-000Cwx-00; Tue, 22 Jun 1999 10:17:25 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: Doug Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG, alex@wnm.net Reply-To: sheldonh@uunet.co.za, Doug , Dag-Erling Smorgrav , alex@wnm.net, freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: misc/11796: Bad lines in 3.2-RELEASE inetd.conf] In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 21 Jun 1999 12:10:47 MST." Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 10:17:25 +0200 Message-ID: <49782.930039445@axl.noc.iafrica.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 21 Jun 1999 12:10:47 MST, Doug wrote: > In fact, the man page is correct, however the inetd code currently > has an outdated version of the canonical name. Thus, at minimum the > man page should be udpated to reflect this reality. A better solution > would be to remove the hard coded values in the code, and fix the > config file. It took me a bit of playing to find the problem, since the PR doesn't say " if I use service name ``auth'' instead of ``inetd'', I get the following error message from inetd: internal service auth unknown " That's the kind of thing I was looking for when I asked you (twice) to send a useful "How-To-Repeat". It doesn't help that people who've run into the problem understand the vague description provided, because I haven't run into it. Now that I understand the problem, I'd like to put forward this proposal: The manual pages for services(5), inetd(8) and inetd.conf(5) are adequate if inetd accepts both canonical service names _and_ aliases. Therefore a healthy, backward-compatible change that is unlikely to accept existing users is to teach inetd to understand service name aliases. I'm not yet saying that this is possible, but I am saying that I'll look into it if it'd make you happy. Whatever your preference is, I'd suggest dropping freebsd-hackers from further discussion. Now that we all understand each other, it's probably more appropriate that the conversation continue on PR feedback only. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message