Re: [hackers] [quark] Rectify error-handling || FRIGN

From: FRIGN <>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 18:13:02 +0200

On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:43:39 +0100
Dimitris Papastamos <> wrote:

> I am personally a fan of inetd and I think that there's nothing
> inherently wrong with the concept.

That's debatable, but honestly, this topic is not that important.

> A simple inetd implementation would be nice to have. It means that
> you can just code a daemon without any networking related code and
> just let inetd hook up stdin/stdout/stderr to the sockets.
> You can sort of hack around this using nc + simple shell scripts.
> A suckless inetd should be relatively straightforward to implement.

I trust you there. A suckless implementation would be cool, given it's
used very frequently.

> I am not sure if quark should support inetd though, as we would need
> to support both inetd and the builtin networking code.

It wouldn't make much sense.



Received on Tue Aug 12 2014 - 18:13:02 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Aug 12 2014 - 18:12:08 CEST