SOFPJF@VM.UOGUELPH.CA (Peter Jaspers-Fayer) (11/23/90)
re 3.3.1 SYSLOG message:
>Nov 19 10:41:17 ccfiris inetd[114]: /usr/etc/smtd: No such file or directory
I tried to reply direct to an earlier posting like this, but got bounced.
3.3.1 inetd.conf has a new line referring to a new driver (smtd) for a
piece of hardware (fddi?) that nobody owns.
Why this was not delivered as a comment, (with instructions to the
.001% of us who have said object to uncomment it out) so that the 99.999%
of us who don't have it don't get bugged by this silly message in SYSLOG
was (hopefully) and oversight.
On the other hand it may be part of a a malicious plot by subversives
within SGI to drive us all crazy ;-) (N.B. smiley, OK, SGI?)
/PJ SofPJF@VM.UoGuelph.Ca
--------------------------------------
It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious.vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (Vernon Schryver) (11/24/90)
In article <9011230735.aa05649@ADM.BRL.MIL>, SOFPJF@VM.UOGUELPH.CA (Peter Jaspers-Fayer) writes: > re 3.3.1 SYSLOG message: > >Nov 19 10:41:17 ccfiris inetd[114]: /usr/etc/smtd: No such file or directory > > 3.3.1 inetd.conf has a new line referring to a new driver (smtd) for a > piece of hardware (fddi?) that nobody owns. You're right about it being FDDI, but you might be wrong the nobody part. > Why this was not delivered as a comment, (with instructions to the > .001% of us who have said object to uncomment it out) so that the 99.999% > of us who don't have it don't get bugged by this silly message in SYSLOG > was (hopefully) and oversight. Some of us kind of hope that more than 1 in 10,000 will want to buy FDDI. We shipped it that way so FDDI would install on 3.3 without pain. Many people are willing and able to edit inetd.conf. Many others are not. I felt strongly that we would get fewer telephone calls from people who noticed the stray line than from others who failed to RTFM and correctly edit inetd.conf. The worst that happens with the extra line is the extra syslog complaint, while the worst that happens with the commented-line is a system that does not work. Yet another point was that there are already several optional products with inetd.conf lines. For example, if you don't install fam, you'll get other messages. Before anyone suggests an installation script that would automatically edit inetd.conf, please imagine what can and will go wrong when such a script meets everyone's wonderful improvements to inetd.conf. Perhaps you'll be mollified to hear that we changed stuff, and are not running the SMT deamon out of inetd.conf. I think we got the offending line out of IRIX 3.3.2. I am happy that you are evidently not complaining about the SGI feature of complaining about non-existent deamons. That feature has sped up the resolution of many telephone calls from people who had decided to save disk space or suffered the ravages of fsck. We've talked about extending the inetd.conf syntax to indicate that some deamons are optional and should not generate syslog complaints. Nothing satisfying has appeared. > On the other hand it may be part of a a malicious plot by subversives > within SGI to drive us all crazy ;-) (N.B. smiley, OK, SGI?) Nope, its just an indication of occupational craziness. But thanks for the compliment of being called subversive. Vernon Schryver, vjs@sgi.com