I thought ONESHOT was more descriptive, the timeout being a selectable attribute of the ONESHOT mode (but also enabling it). But calling it TIMEOUT is OK too. Should I change the name and resubmit the patch or is acceptable as is?
steve On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 4:48 PM, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 27 February 2008, Steven Bradshaw wrote: > > I have added a new feature to telnetd that might > > be of use to others. What I wanted was to use > > telnetd in standalone mode but to only service > > one connection and to exit if the connection is > > not established within a specified timeout. So I > > added a "-t <timeout>" argument to telnetd as a > > sub-feature of the standalone feature. Changes > > are wrapped within the ONESHOT feature. > > ONESHOT == TIMEOUT ? then name it "TIMEOUT", dont name it "ONESHOT" > -mike > _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
