From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/5143 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Open issues at end of April Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 18:50:09 -0400 Message-ID: <20140519225009.GU507@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20140501004058.GA14289@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20140501090842.52c2df97@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1400539832 29507 80.91.229.3 (19 May 2014 22:50:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 22:50:32 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-5148-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Tue May 20 00:50:25 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WmWNy-0000Al-Kh for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 20 May 2014 00:50:22 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 19539 invoked by uid 550); 19 May 2014 22:50:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 19527 invoked from network); 19 May 2014 22:50:21 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140501090842.52c2df97@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:5143 Archived-At: On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 09:08:42AM +0200, Natanael Copa wrote: > getservbyname/getaddrinfo to support aliases in /etc/services. > > But i don't know if there is so much to discuss there. It just needs to > be done. I think this falls under resolver overhaul. For a short-term workaround I'd recommend either changing /etc/services to use separate lines rather than aliases or applying your own local patch. I don't want to spend time reviewing patches for code that's about to be highly refactored/overhauled though (and maybe you don't want to write it either) so the first option may be the best/easiest for everybody. Rich