Re: (Ab)using rcng's features to keep rc.d-style services running should they fail.

On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Xin LI wrote: > Wesley Shields wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 12:30:55PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: > >> Alex Trull wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I realised that because portupgrade/portmaster don't always > >>> cleanly restart processes that have died due to being > >>> u

Re: (Ab)using rcng's features to keep rc.d-style services running should they fail.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Wesley Shields wrote: > On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 12:30:55PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >> Alex Trull wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I realised that because portupgrade/portmaster don't always >>> cleanly restart processes that have died due to being >>> up

Re: (Ab)using rcng's features to keep rc.d-style services running should they fail.

On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 15:11:18 +0100 Alex Trull wrote: > Hi all, > > I realised that because portupgrade/portmaster don't always > cleanly restart processes that have died due to being > upgraded (mysqld, often!) that this was something I wanted > to fix. You can configure portupgrade (and FWIW

Re: (Ab)using rcng's features to keep rc.d-style services running should they fail.

On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 12:30:55PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: > Alex Trull wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I realised that because portupgrade/portmaster don't always > > cleanly restart processes that have died due to being > > upgraded (mysqld, often!) that this was something I wanted > > to fix. >

Re: (Ab)using rcng's features to keep rc.d-style services running should they fail.

Alex Trull wrote: > Hi all, > > I realised that because portupgrade/portmaster don't always > cleanly restart processes that have died due to being > upgraded (mysqld, often!) that this was something I wanted > to fix. I can't speak to portupgrade, however for portmaster there is no such facil

(Ab)using rcng's features to keep rc.d-style services running should they fail.

Hi all, I realised that because portupgrade/portmaster don't always cleanly restart processes that have died due to being upgraded (mysqld, often!) that this was something I wanted to fix. However, I'd seen the daemontools and wasn't a fan - too much to configure with weird directories and so

Re: tcp services (ssh,ftp) does not work

On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 02:07:49AM -0800, kamal kc wrote: > using ftp/ssh on the same computer also does not show > anything --- just blank. try also checking /var/log/auth.log on your serwer and ssh -vvv on your client.. -- regards Marek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] "A false se

Re: tcp services (ssh,ftp) does not work

nted in /etc/inetd.conf > > but still the ssh/ftp services does not work. > > when i ftp from another computer the netstat > shows connection established but the ftp client > does not show anything. > > using ftp/ssh on the same computer also does not show > anything ---

Re: tcp services (ssh,ftp) does not work

For future reference, you should not cross post to FreeBSD lists. If you are unsure what the best list will be, start with freebsd-questions. Good luck, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailin

Re: tcp services (ssh,ftp) does not work

At 02:07 AM 10/30/2005 -0800, kamal kc wrote: | dear all, | | i have put sshd_enable="YES" | and inetd_enable="YES" | in /etc/rc.conf. | | netstat -an also shows that the port numbers | 21 and 22 are in listen state | | ftp is uncommented in /etc/inetd.conf | | but still

tcp services (ssh,ftp) does not work

dear all, i have put sshd_enable="YES" and inetd_enable="YES" in /etc/rc.conf. netstat -an also shows that the port numbers 21 and 22 are in listen state ftp is uncommented in /etc/inetd.conf but still the ssh/ftp services does not work. when i ftp from another comput

Re: nsdispatch services patch + lookupd

On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 02:17:49PM +0400, Michael Bushkov wrote: > Hello! > I've been asking to commit nsdispatch services patch (the patch, which > makes getserv* functions run over nsdispatch interface) since the middle > of summer. And it's still not committed. The pr

Re: nsdispatch services patch + lookupd

On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 09:33:33AM +0200, Danny Braniss wrote: > while trying to add hesiod/dns support, i've noticed, what looks as a problem: > > in nss_tls.h, the function name##_getstate(...) can return a static pointer, > which gets freed in name##_endstate(...), as far as i know, freeing a n

Re: nsdispatch services patch + lookupd

while trying to add hesiod/dns support, i've noticed, what looks as a problem: in nss_tls.h, the function name##_getstate(...) can return a static pointer, which gets freed in name##_endstate(...), as far as i know, freeing a non malloced memory is asking for trouble. proposed fix, instead of stat

nsdispatch services patch + lookupd

Hello! I've been asking to commit nsdispatch services patch (the patch, which makes getserv* functions run over nsdispatch interface) since the middle of summer. And it's still not committed. The problem is that the next release of the lookupd daemon (which i support) depends on this pa

Re: inetd needs "discard" service in /etc/services

On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 10:26:19PM +, David Malone wrote: > On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 02:20:26AM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote: > > How about this patch? > > Looks good to me, if it fixes Brooks's problem. Assuming it compiles and runs, it should work for me since it removes the magic "discard" s

Re: inetd needs "discard" service in /etc/services

On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 02:20:26AM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote: > How about this patch? Looks good to me, if it fixes Brooks's problem. > brooks> The real problem is that we should either not use getaddrinfo to make > brooks> sockaddrs or we should do it on demand when we actually have what we >

Re: inetd needs "discard" service in /etc/services

Hi, > On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:06:30 -0800 > Brooks Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: brooks> Nope, I tried that. It turns out there's an annoying edge case that brooks> makes it not work in this case (from line 496): brooks> * check for special cases. (1) numeric servname is disa

Re: inetd needs "discard" service in /etc/services

On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 10:51:13AM +, David Malone wrote: > > I would like to commit the following patch. It changes the port from > > discard to syslog and documents the dependency. I choose syslog because > > it really does need to be in /etc/services on most machines s

Re: inetd needs "discard" service in /etc/services

> I would like to commit the following patch. It changes the port from > discard to syslog and documents the dependency. I choose syslog because > it really does need to be in /etc/services on most machines since it > starts before NIS. I'll also file a PR against inetd in hop

inetd needs "discard" service in /etc/services

While updating my diskless setup, I was trying to determine the minimal set of entries required in /etc/services in addition to a NIS "+" line to get a system to boot cleanly. I discovered that inetd depends on the existence of the discard service. The dependency is due to the

Re: /etc/services strange

# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2003-10-08 09:49:21 +0100: > On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 10:25:25AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote: > > According to http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers, > > tcp/udp port 1000 is for "cadlock2". Our /etc/services claims > > 1000/tcp

Re: /etc/services strange

On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 10:25:25AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote: > According to http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers, > tcp/udp port 1000 is for "cadlock2". Our /etc/services claims > 1000/tcp is "cadlock", and 1000/ucp "ock". > > Also: ht

/etc/services strange

According to http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers, tcp/udp port 1000 is for "cadlock2". Our /etc/services claims 1000/tcp is "cadlock", and 1000/ucp "ock". Also: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=conf/54371 -- If you cc me or remove the list(

Welcome to Wilson Internet Services!

Pull-Henning Kamp - Thank you for signing up for our Recruiting Resources! Our services were developed to simplify your recruiting efforts. Your account is designed to help you manage the entire online recruiting process in one area. A few of the features we would like to introduce you to

Marketing Services

Warning Unable to process data: multipart/mixed;boundary="=_NextPart_000_280D_6E9D.0BCF"

Re: services...

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 12:30:37PM -0300, leal wrote: > thanks, > but what the point of this forum??? See: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO_8859-1/books/handbook/eresources.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Re: services...

thanks, but what the point of this forum??? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Re: services...

e, encryption... etc.. the parameters of my pccard??? > And, how can i manipulate the services of my box??? the sendmail is running > and i don't know one adminstrative software for ativate and desativate > services... or files that i must edit > thanks for all. > i come in.

services...

can i manipulate the services of my box??? the sendmail is running and i don't know one adminstrative software for ativate and desativate services... or files that i must edit thanks for all. i come in :O) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freeb

Re: OT: registering services

Christoph Kukulies scribbled this message on Aug 24: > Does anyone know what institution I'd have to turn to when I want > to register a port # for a certain program (license server). go visit www.iana.org... -- John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 541 684 8449 Cu Networki

OT: registering services

Does anyone know what institution I'd have to turn to when I want to register a port # for a certain program (license server). -- Chris Christoph P. U. Kukulies k...@gil.physik.rwth-aachen.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of t

Re: OT: registering services

Christoph Kukulies scribbled this message on Aug 24: > Does anyone know what institution I'd have to turn to when I want > to register a port # for a certain program (license server). go visit www.iana.org... -- John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 541 684 8449 Cu Network

OT: registering services

Does anyone know what institution I'd have to turn to when I want to register a port # for a certain program (license server). -- Chris Christoph P. U. Kukulies [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

number. Brian Somers wrote: >I know I'd be pretty annoyed if I tried to do something like ``ssh -p >1234 somewhere'' after configuring my interface in single-user modem >with nis in /etc/host.conf and found that ssh was looking up 1234 in >/etc/services. Even if this

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

rly for the RPC service number. Brian Somers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I know I'd be pretty annoyed if I tried to do something like ``ssh -p >1234 somewhere'' after configuring my interface in single-user modem >with nis in /etc/host.conf and found that ssh was loo

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <199908030624.haa00...@keep.lan.awfulhak.org> Brian Somers writes: : Exactly - ditto for gethostbyname(). In the case of gethostbyname(), : I believe that domain names can't have a number as the first : character - I would have thought this idea should follow through with

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

> In message <199908022217.xaa02...@keep.lan.awfulhak.org> Brian Somers writes: > : Yes, but do it the other way 'round - strtol first, if it's not all > : numeric, getservbyname(). > > I did it getservbyname first in case there were any legacy services > tha

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

> In some email I received from Brian Somers, sie wrote: > [.] > > Yes, but do it the other way 'round - strtol first, if it's not all > > numeric, getservbyname(). > > No, the patch was correct. Not in my book - see my other posting :] -- Brian

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Brian Somers writes: : Exactly - ditto for gethostbyname(). In the case of gethostbyname(), : I believe that domain names can't have a number as the first : character - I would have thought this idea should follow through with : services. No. That

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

> In some email I received from Brian Somers, sie wrote: > [.] > > Yes, but do it the other way 'round - strtol first, if it's not all > > numeric, getservbyname(). > > No, the patch was correct. Not in my book - see my other posting :] -- Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Brian Somers writes: > : Yes, but do it the other way 'round - strtol first, if it's not all > : numeric, getservbyname(). > > I did it getservbyname first in case there were any legacy services > that were all numbers. Trad

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <199908022217.xaa02...@keep.lan.awfulhak.org> Brian Somers writes: : Yes, but do it the other way 'round - strtol first, if it's not all : numeric, getservbyname(). I did it getservbyname first in case there were any legacy services that were all numbers. Traditiona

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Brian Somers wrote: > Yes, but do it the other way 'round - strtol first, if it's not all > numeric, getservbyname(). Can't you have all numeric service names? > David scheidt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in th

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Brian Somers writes: : Yes, but do it the other way 'round - strtol first, if it's not all : numeric, getservbyname(). I did it getservbyname first in case there were any legacy services that were all numbers. Traditionally, this is hwo things w

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Brian Somers wrote: > Yes, but do it the other way 'round - strtol first, if it's not all > numeric, getservbyname(). Can't you have all numeric service names? > David scheidt To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the b

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

[.] > @@ -832,15 +833,21 @@ > if (!sep->se_rpc) { > sp = getservbyname(sep->se_service, sep->se_proto); > if (sp == 0) { > + if ((p = strtol(sep->se_service, > + (char **NULL),

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

[.] > @@ -832,15 +833,21 @@ > if (!sep->se_rpc) { > sp = getservbyname(sep->se_service, sep->se_proto); > if (sp == 0) { > + if ((p = strtol(sep->se_service, > + (char **NULL)

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

dil...@apollo.backplane.com said: > :The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts > :port numbers. : :DES :-- :Dag-Erling Smorgrav - d...@flood.ping.uio.no > > > If we were to depend on this, it would break code compatibility with > other UNIXes for no good reason.

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > :The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts > :port numbers. : :DES :-- :Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > If we were to depend on this, it would break code compatibility with > other UNIXes for no good reason. For example

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Warner Losh writes: > Or getservbyname (which is really what you'd want to change). I have > patches to inetd that I've enclosed here. They are gorss, but the > code itself doesn't lend itself to non-gross patches w/o some rework, > which I was too lazy to do this morning. Or you might as well

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Warner Losh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Or getservbyname (which is really what you'd want to change). I have > patches to inetd that I've enclosed here. They are gorss, but the > code itself doesn't lend itself to non-gross patches w/o some rework, > which I was too lazy to do this morning. O

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <199908021754.daa25...@avalon.reed.wattle.id.au> Darren Reed writes: : Why not just use the changes NetBSD made to their inetd ~6 years ago ? Didn't know about them? Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the messag

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message Bill Fumerola writes: : I agree. The change should be made in inetd, not in getportbyname() Or getservbyname (which is really what you'd want to change). I have patches to inetd that I've enclosed here. They are gorss, but the code itself doesn't lend itself to non-gross patches w/o

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Warner Losh wrote: > I don't think we should change getportbyname. If the getportbyname > fails, see if a strtol returns a number, and if so use that. I don't > see what is so hard about doing that. I agree. The change should be made in inetd, not in getportbyname() > If so

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message Bill Fumerola writes: : Copying the telnet line and changing the first word to 'http' does wonders : for being to access machines from inside a school district's firewall. What if the service has no name? : Choosing ports by number would be nice, however the same objections Matt : ha

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Darren Reed writes: : Why not just use the changes NetBSD made to their inetd ~6 years ago ? Didn't know about them? Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Warner Losh wrote: > I say that I don't care if it allows this. In fact, I want to be able > to do things like that... Copying the telnet line and changing the first word to 'http' does wonders for being to access machines from inside a school district's firewall. Choosing

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes: : Daniel Eischen writes: : > Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: : > > The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts : > > port numbers. : > Are you sure this is what you want? I'm 100% positive that I want this. : >

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes: : Allow me to re-quote the message I answered: : : > I vote for allowing inetd.conf to specify a port number instead of a : > service name... I've said it before, and I'll say it again: This is an excellent idea! Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to major

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bill Fumerola writes: : I agree. The change should be made in inetd, not in getportbyname() Or getservbyname (which is really what you'd want to change). I have patches to inetd that I've enclosed here. They are gorss, but the code itself doesn't lend itself to n

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Warner Losh wrote: > I don't think we should change getportbyname. If the getportbyname > fails, see if a strtol returns a number, and if so use that. I don't > see what is so hard about doing that. I agree. The change should be made in inetd, not in getportbyname() > If s

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bill Fumerola writes: : Copying the telnet line and changing the first word to 'http' does wonders : for being to access machines from inside a school district's firewall. What if the service has no name? : Choosing ports by number would be nice, however the same

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Warner Losh wrote: > I say that I don't care if it allows this. In fact, I want to be able > to do things like that... Copying the telnet line and changing the first word to 'http' does wonders for being to access machines from inside a school district's firewall. Choosing

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes: : Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : > Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: : > > The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts : > > port numbers. : > Are you sure this is what you want? I'm 100% positive that I want

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes: : Allow me to re-quote the message I answered: : : > I vote for allowing inetd.conf to specify a port number instead of a : > service name... I've said it before, and I'll say it again: This is an excellent idea! Warner To Unsubscribe

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

:John-Mark Gurney writes: :> Sheldon Hearn scribbled this message on Aug 1: :> > Would you need these entries if inetd let you specify port numbers :> > instead of service names? :> I vote for allowing inetd.conf to specify a port number instead of a :> service name... it should be very easy to

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

:John-Mark Gurney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: :> Sheldon Hearn scribbled this message on Aug 1: :> > Would you need these entries if inetd let you specify port numbers :> > instead of service names? :> I vote for allowing inetd.conf to specify a port number instead of a :> service name... it sho

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Sheldon Hearn writes: > If we fix this in inetd, we get what we want. If we fix this in > getservbyport() we may get something that we don't want, namely > applications that relay on the existing behaviour of the function stop > working as intended. I don't see in what way an application could br

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On Mon, 02 Aug 1999 07:30:32 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > Are you also going to allow getservbyport to lookup names? And how are you going to squish a name into an int? :-) Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of t

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Daniel Eischen wrote: > Are you also going to allow getservbyport to lookup names? Stupid question. This isn't possible since getservbyport takes an int argument. Dan Eischen eisc...@vigrid.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

on) only wants to allow selection of certain service names. A user could type in any port number that was in /etc/services, and the application would use it. Are you also going to allow getservbyport to lookup names? Dan Eischen eisc...@vigrid.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebs

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

used to, plus a > little more. My application limits the port numbers it'll play with based on what's in /etc/services, since getservbyname() implies this limitation. Administrators rely on the fact that only root can play with /etc/services so that this silly application can't play wi

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On Sat, 31 Jul 1999 23:00:15 MST, Doug wrote: > > Would you need these entries if inetd let you specify port numbers > > instead of service names? > > Errr... while that may be of value to someone, it has nothing to > do with the issue Ben and I were discussing. Yes yes. I'm not trying to

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Daniel Eischen writes: > Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts > > port numbers. > Are you sure this is what you want? Yes. > It may allow an application to > use a port number that would otherwise b

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On 02 Aug 1999 13:19:01 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > Would this not still require modifications to /etc/services for services > > not already mentioned in that file? > > Allow me to re-quote the message I answered: > > > I vote for allowing inetd.conf to sp

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Sheldon Hearn writes: > On 02 Aug 1999 13:05:17 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts > > port numbers. > Would this not still require modifications to /etc/services for services > not already mentioned in th

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > John-Mark Gurney writes: > > Sheldon Hearn scribbled this message on Aug 1: > > > Would you need these entries if inetd let you specify port numbers > > > instead of service names? > > I vote for allowing inetd.conf to specify a port number instead of a > > service nam

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On 02 Aug 1999 13:05:17 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts > port numbers. Would this not still require modifications to /etc/services for services not already mentioned in that file? Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Sheldon Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If we fix this in inetd, we get what we want. If we fix this in > getservbyport() we may get something that we don't want, namely > applications that relay on the existing behaviour of the function stop > working as intended. I don't see in what way an

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

John-Mark Gurney writes: > Sheldon Hearn scribbled this message on Aug 1: > > Would you need these entries if inetd let you specify port numbers > > instead of service names? > I vote for allowing inetd.conf to specify a port number instead of a > service name... it should be very easy to make th

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On Mon, 02 Aug 1999 07:30:32 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > Are you also going to allow getservbyport to lookup names? And how are you going to squish a name into an int? :-) Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Daniel Eischen wrote: > Are you also going to allow getservbyport to lookup names? Stupid question. This isn't possible since getservbyport takes an int argument. Dan Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

on) only wants to allow selection of certain service names. A user could type in any port number that was in /etc/services, and the application would use it. Are you also going to allow getservbyport to lookup names? Dan Eischen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] wi

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

used to, plus a > little more. My application limits the port numbers it'll play with based on what's in /etc/services, since getservbyname() implies this limitation. Administrators rely on the fact that only root can play with /etc/services so that this silly application can&

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On Sat, 31 Jul 1999 23:00:15 MST, Doug wrote: > > Would you need these entries if inetd let you specify port numbers > > instead of service names? > > Errr... while that may be of value to someone, it has nothing to > do with the issue Ben and I were discussing. Yes yes. I'm not trying t

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts > > port numbers. > Are you sure this is what you want? Yes. > It may allow an application to > use a port number th

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On 02 Aug 1999 13:19:01 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > Would this not still require modifications to /etc/services for services > > not already mentioned in that file? > > Allow me to re-quote the message I answered: > > > I vote for allowing inetd.co

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Sheldon Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 02 Aug 1999 13:05:17 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts > > port numbers. > Would this not still require modifications to /etc/services for services > no

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > John-Mark Gurney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Sheldon Hearn scribbled this message on Aug 1: > > > Would you need these entries if inetd let you specify port numbers > > > instead of service names? > > I vote for allowing inetd.conf to specify a port number instead

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

On 02 Aug 1999 13:05:17 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > The correct way to do this is to fix getservbyname() so it accepts > port numbers. Would this not still require modifications to /etc/services for services not already mentioned in that file? Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

John-Mark Gurney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sheldon Hearn scribbled this message on Aug 1: > > Would you need these entries if inetd let you specify port numbers > > instead of service names? > I vote for allowing inetd.conf to specify a port number instead of a > service name... it should be

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

ers objects.. I'd love to be able to do this. I have a firewall-like machine that I run services on several different that have no real names... I'm hacking /etc/services now, which is just wrong... Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freeb

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

ve to be able to do this. I have a firewall-like machine that I run services on several different that have no real names... I'm hacking /etc/services now, which is just wrong... Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <37a3e944.7f28e...@gorean.org>, Doug wrote: } Jon Hamilton wrote: } } > No. ipfw deals with /etc/services only at startup time (any other behavior } on } > its part would be ridiculous). } } That's not entirely true, there are other situations (like adding

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Jon Hamilton wrote: > No. ipfw deals with /etc/services only at startup time (any other behavior on > its part would be ridiculous). That's not entirely true, there are other situations (like adding a rule, etc.) but your point is well taken. And no, I can't provide s

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Nowhere did I mention disk space. I agree that if that were the only is } sue } I wouldn't be raising the objection. } } > > Why is it better to have this in the file than in a man page, } > } > Since it costs nothing to have it in /etc/services, why not leave it } > there

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Jul 1999 15:10:18 MST, Doug wrote: > > > On some of the machines I administer I have some custom entries for > > /etc/services that make more sense than the defaults, especially for > > the ports > 1023. > > Would you

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

n't be raising the objection. > > Why is it better to have this in the file than in a man page, > > Since it costs nothing to have it in /etc/services, why not leave it > there along with the information with which it's associated? The > alternative is to have a manpage

Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Doug wrote: } Jon Hamilton wrote: } } > No. ipfw deals with /etc/services only at startup time (any other behavior } on } > its part would be ridiculous). } } That's not entirely true, there are other situations (like adding a rul } e,

  1   2   >