No, it is no longer relevant. Item 1 is addressed in the new man page,
items 3 and 4 are no longer true under SMF/Greenline and item 2 was
never true IMHO.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This CR has been around for about a decade before it finally landed in 
> my lap.  Can someone tell me if it is still relevant and if so, how to 
> resolve it?
> 
> Thanks
> Doug
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:      CR 4126516 douglas.stevenson, Now responsible engineer P4 
> manpage/section3sock Bad inetd, inetd.conf, listen (3n) man pages
> Date:         Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:33:31 -0600 (MDT)
> From:         [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> *Synopsis*: Bad inetd, inetd.conf, listen (3n) man pages
> http://bt2ws.central.sun.com/CrPrint?id=4126516
> 
> Due to a change requested by [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] is now the responsible engineer for:
> 
> CR 4126516 changed on Aug 28 2007 by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> === Field ============ === New Value ============= === Old Value =============
> 
> Responsible Engineer   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   
> ====================== =========================== ===========================
> 
> 
> *Change Request ID*: 4126516
> 
> *Synopsis*: Bad inetd, inetd.conf, listen (3n) man pages
> 
>   Product: solaris
>   Category: manpage
>   Subcategory: section3socket
>   Type: Defect
>   Subtype: 
>   Status: 3-Accepted
>   Substatus: 
>   Priority: 4-Low
>   Introduced In Release: 
>   Introduced In Build: 
>   Responsible Manager: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   Responsible Engineer: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   Initial Evaluator: 
>   Keywords: 2.5, 2.5.1, 2.6, 2.7
> 
> === *Description* ============================================================
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1998-04-07
> 
>   (Consult [EMAIL PROTECTED] of kernel group about questions arising
>    from this description)
> 
> In the process of fixing bugs in the font server, it has become clear
> that the man (manual) pages for inetd, inetd.conf, and listen (3n) are
> terribly misleading or just simply wrong depending on how you look at
> it.  This is a CRITICAL problem as more and more people attempt to
> write various kinds of servers based upon Sun hardware and software.
> Thus it is EXTREMELY important that this information be correct and
> complete.  More specifically, I found the following defects:
> 
> 
>     1.  WAIT VERSUS NOWAIT AND ACCEPT.  Although the man page for
>         inetd.conf discusses the wait/nowait parameters, no where does
>         it mention the word "accept" in relation to these
>         parameters. The man page actually states:
> 
>         "nowait for all but "single-threaded" datagram servers -
>          servers which do not release the socket until a timeout
>          occurs.  These must have the status wait."
> 
>         Since the sample server I was writing was NOT a datagram
>         server, this statement says that I should use the "nowait"
>         parameter which according to information received from
>         [EMAIL PROTECTED] of the kernel group is incorrect.  Thus this
>         statement is in error since it implies something that is not
>         true. I think this should be remedied by altering the
>         documentation to state that if your tcp server is performing
>         an "accept" that the parameter should be set to "wait".
> 
>     2.  LISTEN MAN PAGE.  If one does a:
> 
>         man -s3n listen
> 
>         to look at the listen man page, no where does it state that
>         that you should receive a EINVAL error (i.e, the error "22"
>         that I was getting from the listen).  Further, it should state
>         that this error "22" (EINVAL) can occur as the result of
>         "nowait" being erroneously being specified in the inetd.conf
>         file instead of "wait".  I think having this information in this
>         man page would prevent alot of errors and needless questions.
> 
>     3.  INETD RESTART.  Again, according to information form
>         [EMAIL PROTECTED] of the kernel group, changing nowait to wait
>         and doing a "kill -HUP" on inetd is NOT sufficient to get
>         inetd to do the right thing.  I think this should be fixed in
>         either the code or the documentation. If you must follow the
>         steps stated by [EMAIL PROTECTED] (i.e., edit the file, do a
>         kill -HUP, edited the file again, do another kill -HUP) then
>         the documentation should state this.  Actually, I think this
>         should be fixed in the code.  I think inetd's parsing of this
>         file should be robust enough to detect a change of "nowait" to
>         "wait" and do the correct thing.  It does not speak well of
>         inetd that it cannot detect this kind of change upon the user
>         doing a "kill -HUP" on it.  If it's too much trouble to fix in
>         the code then I strongly suggest that it be corrected in the
>         documentation.
> 
>     4.  RECOURSE TO REBOOTING.  After inetd disappears for whatever
>         reason (I know of no good reason why it should have but it
>         did), is there any recourse other than rebooting?  If so,
>         whatever it is should go into the documentation.  Rebooting is
>         a real pain so if there is any reliable alternative to
>         rebooting it should be stated.  Also, if there is a recourse
>         to rebooting then this method (whatever it is) sounds like a
>         good way to get inetd to parse the inetd.conf file from
>         scratch and thus get around the inetd parsing problem of the
>         wait/nowait parameters.  If there is no guaranteed reliable
>         way of getting inetd to parse inetd.conf correctly other than
>         rebooting then the documentation should state this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *** (#1 of 1): 2004-08-03 05:27:19 GMT+00:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *** Last Edit: 2004-08-03 05:27:19 GMT+00:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> === *Comments* ===============================================================
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1998-04-07 - Re-categorize to man page group
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1998-04-26
> ----------------------------
> 
> What release of OS are the observations in the description section based on ?
> Atleast some of the error behavior for listen(3n) did change in Solaris 2.6
> and I wonder if all observations apply.
> 
> Some comments
> 
> - the single threaded vs multi threaded terminology used in inetd predates
>   invention of threads and has nothing to do with threads. That can use
>   improvements.
> 
> - The "wait" vs "nowait" server is complicated and not explained well
>   anywhere. Explaining it without example code would be a challenge. Books
>   like "Unix Network Programing" (Richard Stevens) have tried but do not
>   address all issues. Example code for a TCP "wait" server has benefits
>   but not found even in public domain easily. The only public domain code
>   using that feature I have seen is some modified httpd servers.
>   Books usually say use "nowait" for TCP and "wait" for UDP.
> 
> - Any issues with inetd restart should be evaluated as bugs first before
>   any behavior gets documented.
> 
> *** (#1 of 1): 2004-08-03 05:34:04 GMT+00:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *** Last Edit: 2004-08-03 05:34:04 GMT+00:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> === *Evaluation* =============================================================
> Will work with [EMAIL PROTECTED] to make changes for 2.7 fcs.
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1998-06-11
> 
> Will work with [EMAIL PROTECTED] to make changes for next release.
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1998-07-28
> 
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-12-04
> changed RE to mark.ruddell
> 
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-01-16
> Changing RE to me.
> 
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-07-31
> Unfortunately, this bug was never addressed completely, as far as I can see.
> Now, because of Greenline, the issues with inetd(1M) and inetd.conf(4) become
> moot in S10.  I'm unsure whether the complaint vs. listen(3N) (now
> listen(3SOCKET)) remains relevant.  Am changing subcat to 3socket.  
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-08-02
> Accepted. Will investigate.
> 
> *** (#1 of 1): 2004-08-03 05:29:51 GMT+00:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *** Last Edit: 2004-08-03 05:29:51 GMT+00:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> === *Suggested Fix* ==========================================================
> 
> === *Workaround* =============================================================
> 
> === *Justification* ==========================================================
> Documentation is CRITICAL to the correct development of servers on
> Sun workstations.  Since this is something that is being done with
> ever greater frequency,  it is imperative that this information be
> complete and correct.  Hence, the high priority attached to this bug
> 
> Justification by: sweber Date: 1998-06-11 Priority from 2 to 3:
> nroff source is frozen during sgml conversion.  Will work with engineers to
> make changes for 2.7 fcs.
> 
> Justification by: sweber Date: 1998-07-28 Priority from 3 to 4:
> Engineering resources are unavailable to assist in fixing this documentation 
> bug for this release.
> 
> *** (#1 of 1): 2004-08-03 05:31:51 GMT+00:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *** Last Edit: 2004-08-03 05:31:51 GMT+00:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> === *Additional Details* =====================================================
>         Targeted Release: 
>         Commit To Fix In Build: 
>         Fixed In Build: 
>         Integrated In Build: 
>         Verified In Build: 
>   See Also: 
>   Duplicate of: 
>   Hooks:
>         Hook1: 
>         Hook2: 
>         Hook3: 
>         Hook4: 
>         Hook5: 
>         Hook6: 
>   Interest List: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   Program Management: 
>   Root Cause: 
>   Requires Security Coordination: false
>   Fix Affects Documentation: No
>   Fix Affects Localization: No
>   Reported by: 
> 
> === *History* ================================================================
>         Date Submitted: 1998-04-07 17:14:00 GMT+00:00
>         Submitted By: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>         Status Changed    Date Updated                  Updated By
>         1-Dispatched      1998-04-07 17:14:00 GMT+00:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>         3-Accepted        1998-04-07 18:08:00 GMT+00:00 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> === *Solution* ===============================================================
> 
> 
> === *Service Request* ========================================================
>         ID: 330240
>       Customer:
>         Account Name: SunSoft, Inc.
>         Contact Role: D-Development
>         Impact: Significant
>         Functionality: Primary
>         Severity: 2
>         Synopsis: BugTraq+ Customer Call Record for Bugid # 4126516
>         Product Name: solaris
>         Product Release: solaris_7
>         Product Build: 2.7
>         Operating System: 2.7
>         Hardware: generic
>         Reference Number: 
>         Sun Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>         Customer Contact: Rob Johnson
>         Contact Type: I-Internal (SMI) Customer
>         Status: 
>         Source: BugTraq+
>         Reproducible: 
>         Submitted By: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>         Submitted Date: 1998-04-07 17:14:00 GMT+00:00
>         Description: BugTraq+ Sun Contact: robjoh
> 
> 
> === *Activity* ===============================================================
> 
> 
> === *Multiple Release (MR) Cluster* - 0 ======================================
> 
> 
> 
> === *Escalations* ============================================================
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> networking-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]

-- 
blu

Screening ideas are indeed thought up by the Office for Annoying
Air Travelers and vetted through the Directorate for Confusion
and Complexity - Kip Hawley, Head of the TSA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Utterback - Solaris RPE, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Ph:877-259-7345, Em:brian.utterback-at-ess-you-enn-dot-kom
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to