From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jun 21 7:59:21 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from dt054n86.san.rr.com (dt054n86.san.rr.com [24.30.152.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A75014FBF for ; Mon, 21 Jun 1999 07:59:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Studded@gorean.org) Received: from gorean.org (master [10.0.0.2]) by dt054n86.san.rr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA12989; Mon, 21 Jun 1999 07:59:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Studded@gorean.org) Message-ID: <376E5332.2CA33A5E@gorean.org> Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 07:58:58 -0700 From: Doug Organization: Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sheldon Hearn Cc: David Malone , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Inetd and wrapping. References: <90666.929971223@axl.noc.iafrica.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Jun 1999 14:13:49 +0100, David Malone wrote: > > > I got one person who suggested a flag in inetd.conf which could disable > > wrapping for a service. This seems like quite a good idea if we can come > > up with an acceptable syntax for the flag. > > What I have in mind is a -w option. Specified once, it disables wrapping > of internal services. Specified twice, it disables wrapping altogether. Errrr.... > It's a pity we went forward the way we did, making wrapping the default > for STABLE. When exactly was it made the default? Prior to 3.2-Release, or after? > I'd have preferred leaving it disabled by default, for > maximum backward compatibility. However, now that we're here, I think > it'll be a very confusing move to make non-wrapping behaviour the > default. It's never (ok, rarely) too late to undo a bad decision. If the change happened after the latest -Release, by all means, back it out. Very few users adopt -Stable compared to the number of users who adopt releases. If the change happened prior to the release, we're stuck with it for all practical purposes. > There's already a flag in inetd.conf called inetd_flags, in which the > administrator could place her "-w" or "-w -w" as desired. It would be more traditionally unix-like to have a flag for wrapping a service (on by default, or not, see above) and a flag for not wrapping. For instance I could start inetd with the -w flag to wrap all services, and then disable one service with a -d for don't wrap, and vv. Doug To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message