Bernhard,
The example xinetd files floating around should be changed then since I was
using examples found in the threads that appeared most common (and
apparently others are as well). I understand the difference from the
description you sent out, but still am puzzled why it worked last week with
wait set to yes and this week it doesn't.
markh
-----Original Message-----
From: Bernhard R. Erdmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 12:44 PM
To: Mark Holm
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Amrecover - Amandaidx Looping?
> Changing wait=no fixed my problem, but I don't understand why. It worked
> before with wait=yes until I switched out my name servers. I am happy for
> now, but would like to understand...
from man inetd:
The wait/nowait entry is applicable to datagram sockets only (other
sock-
ets should have a ``nowait'' entry in this space). If a datagram server
connects to its peer, freeing the socket so inetd can received further
messages on the socket, it is said to be a ``multi-threaded'' server,
and
should use the ``nowait'' entry. For datagram servers which process all
incoming datagrams on a socket and eventually time out, the server is
said to be ``single-threaded'' and should use a ``wait'' entry. Com-
sat(8) (biff(1)) and talkd(8) are both examples of the latter type of
datagram server. Tftpd(8) is an exception; it is a datagram server that
establishes pseudo-connections. It must be listed as ``wait'' in order
to avoid a race; the server reads the first packet, creates a new
socket,
and then forks and exits to allow inetd to check for new service
requests
to spawn new servers. The optional ``max'' suffix (separated from
``wait'' or ``nowait'' by a dot) specifies the maximum number of server
instances that may be spawned from inetd within an interval of 60 sec-
onds. When omitted, ``max'' defaults to 40.
