From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 22 16:40:16 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C166116A4B3 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 16:40:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E45F343FDF for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 16:40:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h8MNeFFY020908 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 16:40:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h8MNeFEW020907; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 16:40:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 16:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200309222340.h8MNeFEW020907@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Kirk Strauser Subject: Re: bin/57089: "w" does not honor the -n option X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Kirk Strauser List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 23:40:16 -0000 The following reply was made to PR bin/57089; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Kirk Strauser To: Dima Dorfman Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org, brian@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/57089: "w" does not honor the -n option Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 18:39:18 -0500 --=-=-= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At 2003-09-22T22:43:00Z, Dima Dorfman writes: > and it looks like that rationale still applies. That makes a certain kind of sense, I suppose. > I've cc'd brian (who made that change) to see whether he has any input on > this. The issue is: So, you want to see numeric addresses--but for which > family? If a host resolves to a v4 and v6 address, which one should be > displayed? Ideally, you'd see the address of the socket that the user is connecting on. For diagnostic purposes, it'd be nice to get a deterministic answer that tty p0 is connecting from 10.0.5.128, and tty p1 is connecting from 2001:470:1f00:546:2a0:c9ff:fe08:260a . > Perhaps the programs that write to utmp/wtmp should just avoid writing > hostnames? (although this is just a thought--I haven't tried to think > through the implications of doing something like that) Well, I could see that it may be useful to have a "snapshot" of what the hostname was at the time the user originally connected - DNS records do change, after all - but is there a good reason not to additionally store the address? =2D-=20 Kirk Strauser --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA/b4gr5sRg+Y0CpvERAhi5AJ97VGd1BTc0yUIEsGr0u+AfwDy7/wCfSwQ4 20Qcqpwvs9+UeGdiKqyLaE8= =CmFG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--