From owner-freebsd-ports  Sun Apr 20 18:25:12 1997
Return-Path: <owner-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA03821
          for ports-outgoing; Sun, 20 Apr 1997 18:25:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.11])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA03803;
          Sun, 20 Apr 1997 18:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from smap@localhost)
          by dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4)
	  id UAA07545; Sun, 20 Apr 1997 20:24:17 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from sjx-ca83-03.ix.netcom.com(207.94.112.99) by dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3)
	id sma007375; Sun Apr 20 20:21:21 1997
Received: (from asami@localhost) by blimp.mimi.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) id SAA23873; Sun, 20 Apr 1997 18:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 18:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199704210121.SAA23873@blimp.mimi.com>
To: tom@sdf.com
CC: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, markm@FreeBSD.ORG
In-reply-to: <Pine.NEB.3.94.970418104734.7143C-100000@misery.sdf.com> (message from Tom Samplonius on Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:53:16 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: Small patch for xinetd
From: asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 *   This is a small patch for the security/xinetd port.  I've been using
 * xinetd on a production server for a few months now.  The xinetd process
 * was started on Oct 28, 1996 and is still running!

It is ok to send patches like this via send-pr.  That way, we can
redirect the patch to the maintainer easily.

 *   This patch is rather critical for anyone using xinetd in a busy
 * production system with lots of sluggish dial-up PPP connections.

So, Mark, what do you think? :)

Satoshi
-------
 * *** xinetd/defs.h.orig	Thu Mar 20 11:29:27 1997
 * --- xinetd/defs.h	Thu Mar 20 11:29:46 1997
 * ***************
 * *** 100,106 ****
 *   /*
 *    * Used for listen(2)
 *    */
 * ! #define LISTEN_BACKLOG					7
 *   
 *   /*
 *    * When explicit values are given for enum's, that is because the structures 
 * --- 100,106 ----
 *   /*
 *    * Used for listen(2)
 *    */
 * ! #define LISTEN_BACKLOG					64
 *   
 *   /*
 *    * When explicit values are given for enum's, that is because the structures 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * Tom
 * 
 * 
 *