On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Stephen Hemminger
wrote:
> Just translating all null characters to @ seems the most consistent and
> logical. Also translating other all non-printing characters to something
> (maybe '?')
> might be wise. It would be nice if all utilities output the same thing.
I
On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 21:49:35 +0300
Isaac Boukris wrote:
> Hi Stephen, thanks for looking into this.
>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Stephen Hemminger
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:46:48 +0300
> > Isaac Boukris wrote:
> >
> >> Hi again,
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 11:43 PM, I
Hi Stephen, thanks for looking into this.
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Stephen Hemminger
wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:46:48 +0300
> Isaac Boukris wrote:
>
>> Hi again,
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Isaac Boukris wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > The unix(7) man page says that null h
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:46:48 +0300
Isaac Boukris wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Isaac Boukris wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > The unix(7) man page says that null have no special meaning in
> > abstract unix domain socket address (the length is specified
> > therefore).
> >
>
Hi again,
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Isaac Boukris wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The unix(7) man page says that null have no special meaning in
> abstract unix domain socket address (the length is specified
> therefore).
>
> However, when such name (embedding null) is used, ss (and netstat)
> will o
Hello,
The unix(7) man page says that null have no special meaning in
abstract unix domain socket address (the length is specified
therefore).
However, when such name (embedding null) is used, ss (and netstat)
will only show up to the first null occurrence (second technically, if
we count the nul
