Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:23:41 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, Robert Drehmel <robert@zoot.drehmel.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG, robert@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: changing 'struct utmp' Message-ID: <3D1CC5CD.89C51083@mindspring.com> References: <20020628201825.5A84B390F@overcee.wemm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Wemm wrote: > > See > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/functions/getutxent.html > > > > >See also the standardized definition of utmpx.h. > > > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/basedefs/utmpx.h.html > > Incidently, there's nothing here that requires there be a flat file > backing this stuff with fixed size records. A .db file with a format > descriptor could implement this API just fine. Or even a system call, as Robert suggested. It also meets the criteria of something that will make xterm immune to breakage from future changes. All in all, Poul is still right -- utmpx is the way to go, going forward. I still think it might be worthwhile fixing the IPv6 issue with the current code, using Garrett's sockaddr_storage, but not doing anything beyond overflow bugfixing to the current utmp code. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D1CC5CD.89C51083>