From owner-freebsd-questions  Mon Jan  5 19:57:07 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA22429
          for questions-outgoing; Mon, 5 Jan 1998 19:57:07 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions)
Received: from gdi.uoregon.edu (gdi.uoregon.edu [128.223.170.30])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22417
          for <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 5 Jan 1998 19:57:02 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu)
Received: from localhost (dwhite@localhost)
          by gdi.uoregon.edu (8.8.7/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA01601;
          Mon, 5 Jan 1998 19:56:17 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu)
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 19:56:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Doug White <dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu>
Reply-To: Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu>
To: Alex <garbanzo@hooked.net>
cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: inetd (vs. manpages) question
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980104171217.2431D-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980105195514.1402V-100000@gdi.uoregon.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 4 Jan 1998, Alex wrote:

> In poking through the provided inetd.conf (and it's counterpart in the CVS
> tree), I saw that an rpc entry looks like:
> 
> rstatd/1-3      dgram   rpc/udp wait    root    /usr/libexec/rpc.rstatd 
> rpc.rstatd (it has 7 parts).
> 
> However in inetd(8):
> 
>      To specify an ONC RPC-based service, the entry would contain these
>      fields:
> 
>            service name/version
>            socket type
>            rpc/protocol
>            user[:group][/login-class]
>            server program
>            server program arguments
> 
> notice it has 6 sections (it's missing the wait/nowait).  I don't use rpc
> services, so I don't know which is correct (I'm writing an X utility to go
> through inetd.conf).  Either way a small patch (which I'd be willing to
> generate) is in order.  Could someone enlighten me on which is correct?

Inetd.conf is right.  The man page needs to have the [no]wait field
detailed.

> El hombre mas brillante dijo una vez "Cuidado hay NT". (it's a nerd thing)

Someone want to decode this?  Considering the letters `NT' appear in
there, it's either a lame comment promoting Winblows NT or a put-down in
disguise.  :-) 

Doug White                              | University of Oregon  
Internet:  dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu    | Residence Networking Assistant
http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite    | Computer Science Major