On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kieran wrote: > Hi, > > I have just been asked to start looking after a new box. > First thing I see when I run dmesg is: > > May 15 02:04:58 box inetd[29061]: [ID 161378 daemon.error] exec/tcp: > bind: Address already in use > May 15 02:04:58 box inetd[29061]: [ID 161378 daemon.error] shell/tcp: > bind: Address already in use > May 15 02:14:58 box inetd[29061]: [ID 161378 daemon.error] exec/tcp: > bind: Address already in use > May 15 02:14:58 box inetd[29061]: [ID 161378 daemon.error] shell/tcp: > bind: Address already in use > (repeated many times, with 10 minute intervals). > > /var/adm/messages is similarly flooded. > > How do I stop the flood? A quick look in /etc/inetd.conf on that box > shows... > Thanks for the responses on this. I received one suggestion to remove the tcp6 lines from /etc/inetd.conf, and a number of suggestions to look for duplicate inetd processes, either using ps or lsof. ps did not show up a second copy of inetd, and lsof is not available on this box, so I tried to restart with kill -HUP <pid>. This actually failed (log message was: May 15 11:42:39 epdb01 inetd[29061]: [ID 244026 daemon.notice] config: 100232/rpc/udp still active and was not reconfigured. May 15 11:42:39 epdb01 inetd[29061]: [ID 268928 daemon.error] rusersd/rpc/datagram_v,circuit_v: could not get transport information May 15 11:42:39 epdb01 inetd[29061]: [ID 307641 daemon.error] rusersd/rpc/datagram_v,circuit_v: tli_socket: No such file or directory May 15 11:42:39 epdb01 inetd[29061]: [ID 161378 daemon.error] printer/tcp: bind: Address already in use Running /usr/sbin/inetd -s seems to have made the log messages disappear. Is this known behaviour, or do I file it under "strange"? (uname -a gives: SunOS epdb01 5.8 Generic_108528-12 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-Enterprise Regards Kieran _______________________________________________ sunmanagers mailing list sunmanagers@sunmanagers.org http://www.sunmanagers.org/mailman/listinfo/sunmanagersReceived on Wed May 15 13:29:01 2002
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Mar 03 2016 - 06:42:44 EST