Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 16:49:30 -0700 From: David Wolfskill <david@catwhisker.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: It's annoying when something other than rsyncd listens on tco/873 Message-ID: <20100816234930.GL1553@albert.catwhisker.org> In-Reply-To: <20100816054932.GD1553@albert.catwhisker.org> References: <20100816054932.GD1553@albert.catwhisker.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--vJI8q/aziP9idhqk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 10:49:32PM -0700, David Wolfskill wrote: > [... rsyncd(8) port -- 873/tcp -- grabbed by either ypbind or amd before > rsynd started, so rsyncd isn't functional -- and doesn't whine about > it or terminate....] Thanks for the suggestions so far. Unfortunately, I'm finding an actual solution rather elusive still. Some poking around lead me to <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D103401>, which chronicles multipple instantiations of the same kind of problem over a period from 2003-08-29 16:13:45 EDT - 2010-07-21 10:52:43 EDT [so far], with the approach recommended for the RH crowd apparently being to make use of portreserve (<http://cyberelk.net/tim/software/portreserve/>). Unfortunately, doing that would seem to require modifying startup scripts in the base system, as well, which seems to be a significant barrier. [*] -------- * I haven't actually looked at the code, but from reading the comments in the above-cite bug report, the general idea is: * portreserve is started early, and given a list of ports to reserve. * A service that wants to use one of these "reserved" ports would have the start/stop scritp modified to invoke portrelease during start and (re-)invoke portreserve for stop. Of course, this only handles controlled stops, and there could be a race condition.... As it was written for a Linux environment, I'm assuming(!) that the license is not especially attractive for BSD. But as noted above, base system services would need to be modified to invoke it, which rather plays havoc with the otherwise relatively clear distinction (in my mind, anyhow) between "base" vs. "ports." Peace, david --=20 David H. Wolfskill david@catwhisker.org Depriving a girl or boy of an opportunity for education is evil. See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key. --vJI8q/aziP9idhqk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkxpzocACgkQmprOCmdXAD23DACggc7hKWVnb/LTTDEQWM0DDgW8 FX0AnjTV0a/O7GB7NVYQLQQkLK8XVxjB =2+nh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vJI8q/aziP9idhqk--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100816234930.GL1553>