On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Stephen Hemminger
wrote:
> Just translating all null characters to @ seems the most consistent and
> logical. Also translating other all non-printing characters to something
> (maybe '?')
> might be wise. It would be nice if all utilities output the same thing.
I
On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 21:49:35 +0300
Isaac Boukris wrote:
> Hi Stephen, thanks for looking into this.
>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Stephen Hemminger
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:46:48 +0300
> > Isaac Boukris wrote:
> >
> >> Hi again,
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 11:43 PM, I
Hi Stephen, thanks for looking into this.
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Stephen Hemminger
wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:46:48 +0300
> Isaac Boukris wrote:
>
>> Hi again,
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Isaac Boukris wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > The unix(7) man page says that null h
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:46:48 +0300
Isaac Boukris wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Isaac Boukris wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > The unix(7) man page says that null have no special meaning in
> > abstract unix domain socket address (the length is specified
> > therefore).
> >
>
Hi again,
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Isaac Boukris wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The unix(7) man page says that null have no special meaning in
> abstract unix domain socket address (the length is specified
> therefore).
>
> However, when such name (embedding null) is used, ss (and netstat)
> will o
