From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jan 18 4:48: 7 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from smtp.nettoll.com (matrix.nettoll.net [212.155.143.61]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BBF937B401; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 04:47:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by smtp.nettoll.com; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 13:44:10 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <4.3.0.20010118135255.03aefe50@pop.free.fr> X-Sender: usebsd@pop.free.fr X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 13:56:32 +0100 To: Robert Watson From: mouss Subject: Re: Setting default hostname to localhost Cc: Archie Cobbs , Warner Losh , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20010117202543.04e28280@pop.free.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 15:24 17/01/01 -0500, Robert Watson wrote: >On the contrary, there are many applications that expect the results of a >gethostname() to resolve, and point to the local machine. It's arguable >that these applications are broken, but there are enough of them to raise >consideration. They include lpd, sdr, and cvsup. Consider that currently >you can't run the printer spooler if you don't have a hostname that >resolves to an IP; you're right. but in my understanding, the problem was transient: get a hostname to make DHCP works. or am I wrong here? anyway, I have nothing against "locallhost", but then I'd suggest modifying getty to make it coherent. regards, mouss To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message