From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jul 29 07:40:09 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 <freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org>;
	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 <freebsd-standards@hub.freebsd.org>;
	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 <freebsd-standards@freefall.freebsd.org>;
	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 <akosela@andykosela.com>
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 <akosela@andykosela.com>
List-Id: Standards compliance <freebsd-standards.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-standards>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-standards>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-standards@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-standards>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-standards-request@freebsd.org?subject=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 <akosela@andykosela.com>
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 <wollman@csail.mit.edu> 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