From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon May 15 12:55:24 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from po3.wam.umd.edu (po3.wam.umd.edu [128.8.10.165]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC03837B578 for ; Mon, 15 May 2000 12:55:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from howardjp@wam.umd.edu) Received: from rac1.wam.umd.edu (root@rac1.wam.umd.edu [128.8.10.141]) by po3.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA08455 for ; Mon, 15 May 2000 15:54:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rac1.wam.umd.edu (sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rac1.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA03473 for ; Mon, 15 May 2000 15:55:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rac1.wam.umd.edu (howardjp@localhost) by rac1.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA03468 for ; Mon, 15 May 2000 15:55:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200005151955.PAA03468@rac1.wam.umd.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: rac1.wam.umd.edu: howardjp owned process doing -bs To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: utmpx, this is gonna hurt... Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 15:55:13 -0400 From: James Howard Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG How about adding the utmpx as required by SUSV2? It would make writing programs that need to talk to utmp/utmpx a lot simpler. Yes? No? Jamie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message