From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 27 11:07:03 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97A73106567A for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:07:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8418A8FC19 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:07:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6RB73uB019116 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:07:03 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6RB72cu019112 for freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:07:02 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:07:02 GMT Message-Id: <200907271107.n6RB72cu019112@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: gnats set sender to owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:07:04 -0000 Note: to view an individual PR, use: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=(number). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o stand/135307 standards Boot Loader problem on Acer Aspire 5735 o stand/130067 standards Wrong numeric limits in system headers? o stand/129524 standards FreeBSD 7.0 isnt detecting my hardrives with raid5 o stand/128546 standards ls -p does not follow symlinks o bin/125855 standards sh(1) allows for multiline, non-escaped control struct o stand/124860 standards flockfile(3) doesn't work when the memory has been exh o stand/123688 standards POSIX standard changes in unistd.h and grp.h o stand/121921 standards [patch] Add leap second support to at(1), atrun(8) o stand/121568 standards [patch] ln(1): wrong "ln -s" behaviour o stand/120947 standards xsm ignores system.xsm and .xsmstartup o stand/116826 standards [patch] sh support for POSIX character classes o stand/116477 standards rm(1): rm behaves unexpectedly when using -r and relat o bin/116413 standards incorrect getconf(1) handling of unsigned constants gi o stand/116081 standards make does not work with the directive sinclude p stand/107561 standards [libc] [patch] [request] Missing SUS function tcgetsid o stand/104743 standards [headers] [patch] Wrong values for _POSIX_ minimal lim o stand/100017 standards [Patch] Add fuser(1) functionality to fstat(1) o stand/96236 standards [patch] [posix] sed(1) incorrectly describes a functio o stand/96016 standards [headers] clock_getres et al should be in o stand/94729 standards [libc] fcntl() throws undocumented ENOTTY o kern/93705 standards [headers] [patch] ENODATA and EGREGIOUS (for glibc com o stand/92362 standards [headers] [patch] Missing SIGPOLL in kernel headers a stand/86484 standards [patch] mkfifo(1) uses wrong permissions o stand/83845 standards [libm] [patch] add log2() and log2f() support for libm o stand/82654 standards C99 long double math functions are missing o stand/81287 standards [patch] fingerd(8) might send a line not ending in CRL a stand/80293 standards sysconf() does not support well-defined unistd values o stand/79056 standards [feature request] [atch] regex(3) regression tests o stand/70813 standards [patch] ls(1) not Posix compliant o stand/66357 standards make POSIX conformance problem ('sh -e' & '+' command- s kern/64875 standards [libc] [patch] [request] add a system call: fdatasync( s stand/62858 standards malloc(0) not C99 compliant o stand/56476 standards cd9660 unicode support simple hack o stand/54839 standards [pcvt] pcvt deficits o stand/54833 standards [pcvt] more pcvt deficits o stand/54410 standards one-true-awk not POSIX compliant (no extended REs) o stand/46119 standards Priority problems for SCHED_OTHER using pthreads o stand/44425 standards getcwd() succeeds even if current dir has perm 000. p stand/41576 standards POSIX compliance of ln(1) o stand/39256 standards snprintf/vsnprintf aren't POSIX-conformant for strings s stand/36076 standards Implementation of POSIX fuser command o kern/27835 standards [libc] execve() doesn't conform to execve(2) spec in s a docs/26003 standards getgroups(2) lists NGROUPS_MAX but not syslimits.h o bin/25542 standards sh(1) null char in quoted string s stand/24590 standards timezone function not compatible witn Single Unix Spec o bin/24390 standards ln(1) Replacing old dir-symlinks when using /bin/ln o stand/21519 standards sys/dir.h should be deprecated some more s bin/14925 standards getsubopt isn't poisonous enough 48 problems total. From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 27 13:30:02 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9364E1065675 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:30:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53B098FC15 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:30:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6RDU2B8033492 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:30:02 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6RDU2wA033489; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:30:02 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:30:02 GMT Resent-Message-Id: <200907271330.n6RDU2wA033489@freefall.freebsd.org> Resent-From: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org (GNATS Filer) Resent-To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org Resent-Reply-To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org, Andy Kosela Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 719951065674 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:26:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nobody@FreeBSD.org) Received: from www.freebsd.org (www.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::21]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 603478FC28 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:26:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nobody@FreeBSD.org) Received: from www.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by www.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6RDQO78044287 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:26:24 GMT (envelope-from nobody@www.freebsd.org) Received: (from nobody@localhost) by www.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6RDQOWF044267; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:26:24 GMT (envelope-from nobody) Message-Id: <200907271326.n6RDQOWF044267@www.freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:26:24 GMT From: Andy Kosela To: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org X-Send-Pr-Version: www-3.1 Cc: Subject: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:30:02 -0000 >Number: 137173 >Category: standards >Synopsis: `uname -n` incorrect behavior >Confidential: no >Severity: non-critical >Priority: low >Responsible: freebsd-standards >State: open >Quarter: >Keywords: >Date-Required: >Class: change-request >Submitter-Id: current-users >Arrival-Date: Mon Jul 27 13:30:01 UTC 2009 >Closed-Date: >Last-Modified: >Originator: Andy Kosela >Release: >Organization: >Environment: FreeBSD plotinus.lan 7.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE #0: Sat Jun 6 15:21:16 CEST 2009 akosela@plotinus.lan:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 >Description: Currently `uname -n` prints the name of the system (FQDN) to standard output. I believe this is incorrect behavior according to IEEE Std 1003.1. -n Write the name of this node within an implementation-defined communications network. On the other hand though HP-UX, AIX, Solaris, Linux seems to conform to IEEE Std 1003.1 in this aspect and print only the hostname (without the domain name). This feature of uname(1) is important for some of us who rely on `uname -n` in PS1. >How-To-Repeat: >Fix: >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: >Unformatted: From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 27 19:30:04 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 509F2106564A for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:30:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E63C8FC15 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:30:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6RJU3Dq005184 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:30:03 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6RJU3VS005183; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:30:03 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:30:03 GMT Message-Id: <200907271930.n6RJU3VS005183@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: Valentin Davydov Cc: Subject: Re: bin/25542: sh(1) null char in quoted string X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Valentin Davydov List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:30:04 -0000 The following reply was made to PR bin/25542; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Valentin Davydov To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, sp@m.davydov.spb.su Cc: Jilles Tjoelker Subject: Re: bin/25542: sh(1) null char in quoted string Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 22:50:54 +0400 (MSD) At Sat, 4 Apr 2009 14:41:43 +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote: >Considering that fixing this would be a lot of work and cannot be done >completely (for example, argument strings and environment variables >cannot contain '\0'), I think it is best to close this. I think, at least documentation issue mentioned in the original PR 25542 can be corrected easy. Here is the patch: --- src/bin/sh/sh.1.orig 2007-12-05 17:29:07.000000000 +0300 +++ src/bin/sh/sh.1 2009-07-27 22:36:39.000000000 +0400 @@ -2381,4 +2381,6 @@ .Sh BUGS The .Nm -utility does not recognize multibyte characters. +utility does not recognize multibyte characters. +ASCII character in input strings, parameters etc. can be mishandled by +.Nm . From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 27 21:40:02 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7A101065670 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:40:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBD728FC1C for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:40:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6RLe2l5004542 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:40:02 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6RLe2gh004541; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:40:02 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:40:02 GMT Message-Id: <200907272140.n6RLe2gh004541@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: Jilles Tjoelker Cc: Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Jilles Tjoelker List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:40:03 -0000 The following reply was made to PR standards/137173; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Jilles Tjoelker To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, akosela@andykosela.com Cc: Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:31:56 +0200 I understand that `uname -n`'s behaviour may be inconvenient to you, but I do not see why it is not compliant. An FQDN seems a valid "name of this node within an implementation-defined communications network". You can use shell-specific prompt expansions that generate the hostname without domain, or myhost=`uname -n`; myhost=${myhost%%.*}. -- Jilles Tjoelker From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 27 21:50:10 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A379D1065722 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:50:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1E678FC29 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:50:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6RLo800011711 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:50:08 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6RLo8TS011707; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:50:08 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:50:08 GMT Message-Id: <200907272150.n6RLo8TS011707@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: Garrett Wollman Cc: Subject: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Garrett Wollman List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:50:11 -0000 The following reply was made to PR standards/137173; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Garrett Wollman To: Andy Kosela Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:19:36 -0400 < said: > Currently `uname -n` prints the name of the system (FQDN) to standard output. I believe this is incorrect behavior according to IEEE Std 1003.1. > -n > Write the name of this node within an implementation-defined communications network. What makes you think that the behavior of "uname -n" does not match this description? -GAWollman From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 28 08:40:04 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56927106566B for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:40:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 456F98FC08 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:40:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6S8e3t1050122 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:40:03 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6S8e33A050121; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:40:03 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:40:03 GMT Message-Id: <200907280840.n6S8e33A050121@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: Andy Kosela Cc: Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Andy Kosela List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:40:04 -0000 The following reply was made to PR standards/137173; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andy Kosela To: wollman@csail.mit.edu Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:17:29 +0200 Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > > > Currently `uname -n` prints the name of the system (FQDN) to standard output. I believe this is incorrect behavior according to IEEE Std 1003.1. > > > -n > > Write the name of this node within an implementation-defined communications network. > > What makes you think that the behavior of "uname -n" does not match > this description? Hi Garrett, All UNIX systems I got access to prints only hostname without the domain information (same as 'hostname -s'). Is this some historical peculiarity of FreeBSD? I see it uses KERN_HOSTNAME which is indeed FQDN. On top of that common sense tells me that "node within an implementation-defined communications network" is just a node name, and not a full domain name information. What you think? --Andy From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 28 20:30:04 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2DBE1065675 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:30:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90FF38FC20 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:30:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6SKU4QB098798 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:30:04 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6SKU4h6098789; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:30:04 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:30:04 GMT Message-Id: <200907282030.n6SKU4h6098789@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: Garrett Wollman Cc: Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Garrett Wollman List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:30:05 -0000 The following reply was made to PR standards/137173; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Garrett Wollman To: Andy Kosela Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:29:07 -0400 < said: > All UNIX systems I got access to prints only hostname without the domain > information (same as 'hostname -s'). Legacy Unix implementations used the UUCP name, which was completely unconnected to any other notion of the host's name. Few people use UUCP any more, and in any case, they are free to set their hostname to something other than an FQDN if they want. > On top of that common sense tells me that "node within an > implementation-defined communications network" is just a node name, and > not a full domain name information. What you think? In what way is an FQDN not a node name? -GAWollman From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 28 20:50:04 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F512106566C for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:50:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53B8A8FC1B for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:50:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6SKo4tL015674 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:50:04 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6SKo45Z015671; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:50:04 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:50:04 GMT Message-Id: <200907282050.n6SKo45Z015671@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: John Hein Cc: Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: John Hein List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 20:50:04 -0000 The following reply was made to PR standards/137173; it has been noted by GNATS. From: John Hein To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, akosela@andykosela.com Cc: Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:16:17 -0600 It seems at least part of this report is inaccurate. I tested on linux (Fedora 10) and it seems to behave the same as freebsd... [root@foo ~]# hostname foo.example.com [root@foo ~]# uname -n foo.example.com From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 29 07:10:02 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E13031065673 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:10:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEB928FC37 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:10:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6T7A2Kh095213 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:10:02 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6T7A2TF095212; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:10:02 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:10:02 GMT Message-Id: <200907290710.n6T7A2TF095212@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: Andy Kosela Cc: Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Andy Kosela List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:10:03 -0000 The following reply was made to PR standards/137173; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andy Kosela To: jhein@timing.com, bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 09:00:52 +0200 John Hein wrote: > It seems at least part of this report is inaccurate. > I tested on linux (Fedora 10) and it seems to behave > the same as freebsd... > > [root@foo ~]# hostname > foo.example.com > [root@foo ~]# uname -n > foo.example.com I tested it on SLES and Debian only. You are right, RedHat behaves differently. It seems there is no consensus about -n behavior even in the Linux camp. --Andy From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 29 07:40:09 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57418106564A for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:40:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44FFD8FC1C for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:40:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6T7e9LH045646 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:40:09 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6T7e9uf045645; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:40:09 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:40:09 GMT Message-Id: <200907290740.n6T7e9uf045645@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: Andy Kosela Cc: Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Andy Kosela List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:40:09 -0000 The following reply was made to PR standards/137173; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andy Kosela To: wollman@csail.mit.edu Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 09:32:53 +0200 Garrett Wollman wrote: > In what way is an FQDN not a node name? Yes, 'uname -n' comes from UUCP times. I think our discussion boils down to nodename vs hostname, which in legacy UNIX can have different values. For me it seems natural that nodename (coming from old UUCP) should be identical to hostname without the full domain name information. Is out there some standard defining it and explaining how nodename (UUCP) convention should be applied to hostname (ARPA, NFS) convention? --Andy From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 29 16:00:19 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88A2C1065672 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:00:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 762F18FC23 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:00:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6TG0JRZ044490 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:00:19 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6TG0J12044489; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:00:19 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:00:19 GMT Message-Id: <200907291600.n6TG0J12044489@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org From: Garrett Wollman Cc: Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Garrett Wollman List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:00:19 -0000 The following reply was made to PR standards/137173; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Garrett Wollman To: Andy Kosela Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:52:34 -0400 < said: > information. Is out there some standard defining it and explaining how > nodename (UUCP) convention should be applied to hostname (ARPA, NFS) > convention? No, that's why the POSIX specification leaves it completely implementation-defined. You have to remember that this value originally came from a "struct utsname" which had fixed-length (eight?-byte) fields, and the name was compiled into the kernel. (Hence UUCP names like "ihnp4", "mhuxu", and so on.) -GAWollman