Re: [RFC] inetd(8) changes proposal

[Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

>> So I added a new file descriptor type (well, semi-new; they're
>> DTYPE_MISC) and a new syscall (pidconn) [...]

> In this area (as others, in fact), the Plan9 solution is quite
> elegant (and consistent with the whole design): in the /proc/
> directory, the process has its directory /proc/$pid/, under which
> there is "ctl" file to which one can write textual messages to
> control the process:

> echo $cmd >/proc/$pid/ctl

That is unidirectional communication.  pidconn is bidirectional.  Aside
from that, how does the process (a) notice that this has been done and
(b) get the string ($cmd in the above) to act on it?

The procfs I have has a ctl file, but it is ptrace-style control, not
communication a la pidconn (which is optional, more like sockets).  It
also appears to have vanished by 9.1.  Besides those, I'm not sure how
I feel about depending on procfs.

/~\ The ASCII				  Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML		mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B