From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri May  8 14:27:21 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 927BD106566B
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  8 May 2009 14:27:21 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il)
Received: from kabab.cs.huji.ac.il (kabab.cs.huji.ac.il [132.65.16.84])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FBEF8FC14
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  8 May 2009 14:27:21 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il)
Received: from pampa.cs.huji.ac.il ([132.65.80.32])
	by kabab.cs.huji.ac.il with esmtp id 1M2R2m-0002Z4-9P
	for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Fri, 08 May 2009 17:27:20 +0300
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.2
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 17:27:20 +0300
From: Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il>
Message-ID: <E1M2R2m-0002Z4-9P@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il>
Subject: fputsock()/fgetsock() replacement
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 14:27:21 -0000

hi,
 Since the comment in the kernel is:
	'Note: fputsock() is deprecated, see comment for fgetsock().'
I'm looking for a replacement, on the other hand, this quote:
  deprecated
       
          Said of a program or feature that is considered obsolescent
          and in the process of being phased out, usually in favour of a
          specified replacement.  Deprecated features can,
          unfortunately, linger on for many years.  This term appears
          with distressing frequency in standards documents when the
          committees writing the documents realise that large amounts of
          extant (and presumably happily working) code depend on the
          feature(s) that have passed out of favour.
       
          See also {dusty deck}.
       
          [{Jargon File}]
       
          (1995-04-19)

got me wondering if I should hurry.
cheers,
	danny