Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 16 Mar 1995 11:50:48 -0600 (CST)
From:      Peter da Silva <peter@bonkers.taronga.com>
To:        phk@ref.tfs.com (Poul-Henning Kamp)
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: diskless and 3Com 509
Message-ID:  <199503161750.LAA00166@bonkers.taronga.com>
In-Reply-To: <199503161721.JAA11807@ref.tfs.com> from "Poul-Henning Kamp" at Mar 16, 95 09:21:26 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > 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.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199503161750.LAA00166>