Re: talk/talkd on solaris 2.8

[Michael Weiser]

On Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Alain Magloire wrote:

> > Therefore I just needed to adjust my utmpx-patch and it worked OOB. I just
> > have to recheck tomorrow if it works okay under X since I compiled it
> > remotely from my home Linux box and just checked it from there on text
> > console. I can give you ultimate feedback on that then, but I'm very
> > confident that it does work fine like it is now.
> Patch apply.
I just rechecked on Solaris X and it works as supposed - the talk announce
appears on the least recently used console.

> You forgot the entries for talkd/ChangeLog, add one for you.
> Thanks for looking at this.
Oh sorry, I knew I forgot something. :-\

> > Perhaps one should add some check if utmpx is really used on that system
> > and the user wants to use it too since I know that at least IRIX 6.5 has
> > utmpx-support but also keeps a utmp in sync for compatibility with older
> > applications.
> The direction is to move away from utmp, completely.  And if we need
> support for it, we could provide stub functions in libinetutils.
Don't know whether this is a good idea since I also have some NeXTstep 3.3
boxes which certainly haven't heard of utmpx yet.

> Something like.
> void setutxent ()
> {
>       setutent ();
> }
>
> This will reduce the number of #ifdef and make the code readable.
This'd be an option. I'd do it but I guess I'm just not well known enough
with your code structure and coding style.

BTW: I just saw at least one unneeded #ifdef which I'll take out for the
IRIX compile and submit together with the rest.

> > Apropos IRIX: Is there some need for experiences with IRIX 6.5? I have
> IRIX, is not on my list of target for the release, but if you have time
> to poke around, I will not refuse clean patches.
I'll have a look.
-- 
bye, Micha