Subject: Re: Another changer, another changer problem
To: Greg A. Woods <>
From: Nathan J. Williams <nathanw@MIT.EDU>
List: current-users
Date: 10/18/1998 23:53:38
>In theory SysVr4 ports should never have come with inetd, but of course
>in practice the vendors were swayed by those who wanted a more BSD-like
>system, regardless of the fact that the SAC subsystems, including
>listen, are generally a more mature design and with a reliable and
>simple table-driven parent daemon watching over the flock it's a much
>more robust design too.

>From the stock /etc/init.d/inetsvc on a Solaris 2.6 box:

# Run inetd in "standalone" mode (-s flag) so that it doesn't have
# to submit to the will of SAF.  Why did we ever let them change
# inetd?
/usr/sbin/inetd -s

	There may be some theoretical validity behind your claims that
SAC/SAF is a more mature design and should obviate inetd, but
apparantly some engineers at Sun disagree, and they're pretty deep in
the trenches.

	- Nathan