Re: pidfile

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 02:53:26PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> 
> :Fixed the mixup with pidfile that was preventing kerberos5 from being
> :built after pidfile() was added to libutil.  This could probably be done
> :right by redoing configure with the later libutil; configure does look
> :at this.  However, I don't know the canonical method, other than just by 
> :hand, of getting from autoconf contrib packages to the bmake system...

I'll fix that, thanks.

> :
> :Does noone else use kerberos?  I've seen no complaints.

Doesn't seems so :)

> :
> :-- Pete
> 
>     Maybe we should rename pidfile() in libutil to something else
>     instead.  It's a pretty aweful name for libutil to choose to use 
>     anyway!  Maybe something like make_pidfile() ?  Comments?  From
>     what I can tell there isn't much in our tree that actually uses it.

It isn't used for now, but we can replace a lot of the handrolled
implemenations in base with it. I think keeping the name compatible
with NetBSD is better in this instance.

Joerg

> 					-Matt