Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:15:16 -0500 From: Jeffrey Goldberg <jeffrey@goldmark.org> To: Jonathan McKeown <jonathan@hst.org.za> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: command to inentify the process that is listening in a port. Message-ID: <96E680AE-5ECD-414D-838D-85DB034C99F9@goldmark.org> In-Reply-To: <200704101000.03164.jonathan@hst.org.za> References: <b713df2c0704090758h59657b8csc7716d3fe1f91943@mail.gmail.com> <b713df2c0704090759t1abcc96bld4978bbedec38687@mail.gmail.com> <461A5D9E.2010501@aeternal.net> <200704101000.03164.jonathan@hst.org.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Apple-Mail-21-346030177 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed On Apr 10, 2007, at 3:00 AM, Jonathan McKeown wrote: > On Monday 09 April 2007 17:37, Martin Hudec wrote: >> Siju George wrote: >>> How Do you actually Identify what process is listening on a TCP/ >>> IP port? >> man lsof > Just out of interest, why do so many people recommend lsof, which > is a port, > when sockstat/fstat are in the base system and seem to cover the > same ground? > Am I missing something about lsof? A few weeks ago, I would have recommended lsof simply because I wasn't aware of sockstat. It's only from reading things on this list that I've learned about sockstat. And thanks to your message, I've now learned about fstat. Since learning about sockstat, I haven't used lsof, even though lsof was one of the first things I installed from ports when I set up my system. I don't know if others have different reasons for recommending lsof, but speaking for myself, I simply wouldn't have known better. Cheers, -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/ --Apple-Mail-21-346030177--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?96E680AE-5ECD-414D-838D-85DB034C99F9>