Re: Is netstat b?rked?

2003-01-30 Thread Juli Mallett
* De: "Scott R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ Data: 2003-01-30 ] [ Subjecte: Re: Is netstat b?rked? ] > On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 12:30:44AM -0800, Juli Mallett wrote: > > * De: Ruslan Ermilov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ Data: 2003-01-30 ] > > [ Subjecte: Re: Is n

Re: Is netstat b?rked?

2003-01-30 Thread Scott R.
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 12:30:44AM -0800, Juli Mallett wrote: > * De: Ruslan Ermilov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ Data: 2003-01-30 ] > [ Subjecte: Re: Is netstat b?rked? ] > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 02:07:50PM -0800, Juli Mallett wrote: > > > ref5% ne

Re: Is netstat b?rked?

2003-01-30 Thread Juli Mallett
* De: Ruslan Ermilov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ Data: 2003-01-30 ] [ Subjecte: Re: Is netstat b?rked? ] > On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 02:07:50PM -0800, Juli Mallett wrote: > > ref5% netstat -na -p tcp > > ref5% > > > > dalek# netstat -an -p tcp > > dalek#

Re: Is netstat b?rked?

2003-01-30 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 02:07:50PM -0800, Juli Mallett wrote: > ref5% netstat -na -p tcp > ref5% > > dalek# netstat -an -p tcp > dalek# > Both beast and ref5 are from Jan 4 and exhibit this problem; builder, which is from Jan 28, doesn't. Perhaps, someone updated the kernel and forgot to updat