Re: diffrent behaviour of mailq, and some other stuff

[Matti Aarnio <mea@nic.funet.fi>]

On Thu, Nov 11, 1999 at 04:39:33PM -0500, Andy Poling wrote:
> >   Main "problem" is that it desires to bind the TCP/174 port with
> >   a wild-card host address.  Thus starting two processes causes
> >   another one to complain about the situation.
> 
> As I recall, way back when, the scheduler (and mailq) had an option to use a
> UNIX domain socket instead.  Is that no longer an option?
> 
> It seems like it would solve this guy's problem because the chrooted system
> would (could) have a different UNIX domain socket...

  The code is still there, but it is based on some strange SIGUSR2
  signal handler, and a rendezvous PIPE  (a named pipe)  parametrized
  with a '-q' option to the scheduler.

  Still the TCP based socket is attempted to reinit every so often,
  and that is a sort of a problem here.

  I don't recall there ever been an AF_UNIX socket, although such would
  make immense sense these days as an alternate to TCP based interface
  socket.

> -Andy

-- 
/Matti Aarnio	<mea@nic.funet.fi>