From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Mar 16 10:09:50 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id KAA16957 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 16 Mar 1995 10:09:50 -0800
Received: from UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU (root@UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU [129.7.1.11]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id KAA16925 for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 16 Mar 1995 10:09:45 -0800
Received: from Taronga.COM by UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU with UUCP id AA06630
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5); Thu, 16 Mar 1995 11:51:29 -0600
Received: by bonkers.taronga.com (smail2.5p) id AA00169; 16 Mar 95 11:50:49 CST (Thu)
Received: (from peter@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id LAA00166; Thu, 16 Mar 1995 11:50:48 -0600
From: Peter da Silva <peter@bonkers.taronga.com>
Message-Id: <199503161750.LAA00166@bonkers.taronga.com>
Subject: Re: diskless and 3Com 509
To: phk@ref.tfs.com (Poul-Henning Kamp)
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 11:50:48 -0600 (CST)
Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <199503161721.JAA11807@ref.tfs.com> from "Poul-Henning Kamp" at Mar 16, 95 09:21:26 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 648       
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > I've seen a lot of criticism of BSD-derived telnets because you can't use
> > them for Q&D smtp or nntp information snarfing because they exit on EOF.
> > Apparently USG-derived ones wait for the other end to shut down if stdin
> > is a plain file. I'd like some inputs on the pros and cons of copying the
> > USG behaviour in this case.

> well, go fix it :-)

I'm going to. I'm just asking whether people are likely to get on my case
about doing so. When I proposed adopting USG behaviour in init on the NetBSD
list they got all over me about it being a disgusting System V monstrosity.
I'd rather not step on anyone's toes this time around.