Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:39:52 +0200 From: "Cyrille Lefevre" <clefevre-lists@9online.fr> To: "John Merryweather Cooper" <johnmary@adelphia.net>, "Drew Broadley" <drew@corrupt.co.nz> Cc: Colin Percival <colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk> Subject: Re: bringing /etc/services up to date Message-ID: <01b401c4641f$80a30e70$7890a8c0@dyndns.org> References: <6.1.0.6.1.20040707033352.03dbca18@popserver.sfu.ca> <40EBDA99.5020309@corrupt.co.nz> <1089200316.55099.10.camel@68-169-191-150.losaca.adelphia.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"John Merryweather Cooper" <johnmary@adelphia.net> wrote: > On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 04:12, Drew Broadley wrote: > > Colin Percival wrote: > > > > > I've put together a patch to bring /etc/services up to date with > > >almost a decade of IANA port assignments. Unfortunately, this > > >turned out to be rather larger than I expected: It adds 6400 lines, > > >and increases the size of /etc/services from 73 kB to 327 kB. > > > Is anyone going to be very unhappy if I go ahead and commit this? > > > > > What are the netstat calls to /etc/services like with the update, any > > performance decrease ? > > > > (I cannot think of any other application that uses them off the top of > > my head) > > ipfw uses /etc/services if you use, e.g., "domain" instead of "53" in > your rules. I would hope any application that seriously used > /etc/services would read it once, store it in some speedily accessible > form, and work from there. As a flat, human-created file, /etc/services > would not be my candidate for efficient program access. except if you implement some kind of nscd (name service cache daemon) :) Cyrille Lefevre. -- mailto:clefevre-lists@9online.fr
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01b401c4641f$80a30e70$7890a8c0>