Thank you for your concerns, > Wouldn't this better be a separate daemon?
I chose inetd because it is already built to spawn and monitor processes. Creating a separate daemon would involve replicating a lot of this code into another codebase. Additionally, the new parameters that I am adding should work with not only the new general purpose daemons, but also the networking ones. > And isn't it a kind of systemd? Yes, this can be considered a kind of systemd *sweats*. However, most of the features are actually inspired by launchd. I think there have been some, semi-successful, attempts to port Apple’s launchd into the BSDs already: https://wiki.freebsd.org/launchd So, I thought trying to integrate them into inetd would be a good idea.
