[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bug in hostname
|
From: |
Martin MOKREJŠ |
|
Subject: |
Re: bug in hostname |
|
Date: |
Sat, 3 Apr 2004 10:28:46 +0200 (CEST) |
Hi,
any news on this? It seems noone has even contacted net-tools guys. I
did, see attached messages. It seems they have no objections. So, when
could I get new version of coreutils with overtaken hostname? ;)
--
Martin Mokrejs <address@hidden>
PGP5.0i key is at http://www.natur.cuni.cz/~mmokrejs
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug in hostname |
|
Date: |
Tue, 7 Oct 2003 10:54:53 -0600 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
Martin MOKREJ? wrote:
> Hi,
> hostname(1) does not accept -s option to print short hostname,
> ie. not foo.bar.baz but only foo. It is required on Tru64Unix 5.1A
> during system startup. When hostname from coreutils is found,
> the system hostname is set improperly(to "-s").
Many software distributions use the net-tools 'hostname' command
instead of the coreutils 'hostname' command. It provides much more
capability. Perhaps that would be a good solution for you as well.
http://www.tazenda.demon.co.uk/phil/net-tools/
Bob
> Please provide full compatibility:
>
> hostname(1) hostnam=
> e(1)
>
>
>
> NAME
>
> hostname - Sets or displays the name of the current host system
>
> SYNOPSIS
>
> hostname [-s] [new_name]
>
> DESCRIPTION
>
> The hostname command sets or displays the name of the current host syst=
> em.
> If you use the -s option, the short form of the host name is displayed.
> Only the superuser can set the hostname.
>
> EXAMPLES
>
> 1. To display the short form of the local host name, enter:
> $ hostname -s
> host1
>
> 2. To change the name of the local host, enter:
> # hostname west
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> addax.gsf.de# /afs/gsf.de/alpha_dux51/usr/bin/hostname --help
> Usage: /afs/gsf.de/alpha_dux51/usr/bin/hostname [NAME]
> or: /afs/gsf.de/alpha_dux51/usr/bin/hostname OPTION
> Print or set the hostname of the current system.
>
> --help display this help and exit
> --version output version information and exit
>
> Report bugs to <address@hidden>.
> addax.gsf.de# rcmgr get HOSTNAME
> addax.gsf.de
> addax.gsf.de# /afs/gsf.de/alpha_dux51/usr/bin/hostname
> addax.gsf.de
> addax.gsf.de# /usr/sbin/hostname
> addax.gsf.de
> addax.gsf.de# /afs/gsf.de/alpha_dux51/usr/bin/hostname -s
> addax.gsf.de# /usr/sbin/hostname
> -s
> addax.gsf.de#
>
>
> --=20
> Martin Mokrejs <address@hidden>, <address@hidden>
> PGP5.0i key is at http://www.natur.cuni.cz/~mmokrejs
> MIPS / Institute for Bioinformatics <http://mips.gsf.de>
> GSF - National Research Center for Environment and Health
> Ingolstaedter Landstrasse 1, D-85764 Neuherberg, Germany
> tel.: +49-89-3187 3683 , fax:=A0+49-89-3187 3585
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-coreutils mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug in hostname |
|
Date: |
Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:09:52 +0100 (MET) |
I just had a look into
http://www.tazenda.demon.co.uk/phil/net-tools/ and they are GNU
version 2 licensed.
You mean "GNU General Public License version 2", and what the license
is, is irrelevant to the discussion.
> Debian GNU/Hurd uses net-tools I belive, but this conflicts with
> inetutils. Maybe a solution would be to move hostname into
> inetutils, where it really belongs. What do you think? I'll
> happily do the move.
My Gentoo box uses hostname/ifconfig from net-tools. What do you
meant "conflicts?
That you cannot install both packages because both provide the same
tools (if not all, then some of the tools).
I don't understand why should hostname move into inetutils.
Because it is a "internet" tool.
I don't know much about Hurd, but couldnt Hurd use hostaname from
net-tools too?
Yes, but then you can't use inetutils.
I thought we just don't want to build coreutils's hostname on boxes
where /usr/bin/hostname exists already or when the version from
net-tools is know to perform better.
Recall that coreutils doesn't only run on GNU-variants, it runs on a
wide selection of operating systems. It would be quite possible that
these systems would end up not having hostname. And net-tools (from
the little I know about it) only supports GNU-variant systems like
GNU/Linux and GNU/Hurd.
It seems that the maintainer of net-tools is a GNU hacker, maybe it
would be possible to merge net-tools with inetutils....
Personally, if configure in coreutils would include a code to disable
hostname based on certain criteria, I would be happy with that too.
That is ugly, and it is impossible to figure out what this criteria
is.
Cheers.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug in hostname |
|
Date: |
Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:02:59 -0500 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden> wrote:
> I don't understand why should hostname move into inetutils.
>
> Because it is a "internet" tool.
Well, it has sort of become one. But Unix has had hostname longer
than it has had networks, IIRC, and hostname does not do any network
communication itself. I think coreutils is a fine place for hostname,
but inetutils would be ok too.
> Recall that coreutils doesn't only run on GNU-variants, it runs on a
> wide selection of operating systems. It would be quite possible that
> these systems would end up not having hostname.
That doesn't seem very likely to me, but along the same lines, even
though the system may already have one version of the command
installed, people often install the GNU version because they like it
better. Deciding which version should appear first in $PATH is a
choice made by distributors, admins, and users, not the maintainers of
the commands.
> Personally, if configure in coreutils would include a code to disable
> hostname based on certain criteria, I would be happy with that too.
>
> That is ugly, and it is impossible to figure out what this criteria
> is.
There is precedent for a ./configure option like --disable-hostname; I
think that's the sort of thing Martin was talking about.
But the best proposal I've heard so far is to merge the version from
gettext into coreutils. That version supports all the options people
have asked for, and its copyright is already assigned to the FSF.
paul
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug in hostname |
|
Date: |
Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:46:29 +0100 (MET) |
> Personally, if configure in coreutils would include a code to
> disable hostname based on certain criteria, I would be happy
> with that too.
>
> That is ugly, and it is impossible to figure out what this
> criteria is.
There is precedent for a ./configure option like
--disable-hostname; I think that's the sort of thing Martin was
talking about.
I understood it as having configure do some magic and see what the
user wanted, if what you say is what Martin ment, then I see no
problem with that.
But the best proposal I've heard so far is to merge the version
from gettext into coreutils. That version supports all the options
people have asked for, and its copyright is already assigned to the
FSF.
Note that I'm not against this, I'm just against removing hostname
from coreutils and not moving it into inetutils; or something similar.
Cheers.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug in hostname |
|
Date: |
Thu, 29 Jan 2004 00:45:43 -0500 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Martin MOKREJŠ <address@hidden> wrote:
> say: by default don't build hostname on Solaris, Irix, where else too?
Defaults should be the same on all platforms, I'd say. Once the full
featured hostname is incorporated into coreutils, I don't see any
reason for it to get special treatment.
>> But the best proposal I've heard so far is to merge the version
>> from gettext into coreutils.
>
> So how about the above? I'm also for this solution. ;)
>From what Jim and Bruno have been saying, it sounds like it's
underway.
paul
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: coreutils/hostname and net-tools/hostname |
|
Date: |
Thu, 1 Apr 2004 11:22:25 +0100 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
Hi Martin
I hadn't heard anything about this, no. As far as I am concerned, yes,
you are very welcome to take the code from net-tools and integrate it
into coreutils (or inetutils, as seemed to be suggested in one of the
mails you forwarded). Bernd, do you have any objection to that?
p.
on Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 12:08:42PM +0200, Martin MOKREJ? wrote:
> Hi,
> have you already been contacted regarding integration of the
> net-tools implementation of hostname(1) into coreutils? The hostname
> present in coreutils is not very smart and is causing only troubles. It
> seems almost everyone would benefit from replacement of that code with
> something better. I've attached few emails from the related thread.
> In conclusion, would you give away your code or propose another way how to
> keep teh second copy of hostname up to date in the second source tree? ;)
> Regards,
> Martin
>
> --
> Martin Mokrejs <address@hidden>
> PGP5.0i key is at http://www.natur.cuni.cz/~mmokrejs
Content-Description: Digest of 4 messages
Content-Description: Re: bug in hostname (fwd)
> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:09:52 +0100 (MET)
> From: "Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden>
> To: Martin MOKREJ? <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden, address@hidden
> Subject: Re: bug in hostname
>
>
> I just had a look into
> http://www.tazenda.demon.co.uk/phil/net-tools/ and they are GNU
> version 2 licensed.
>
> You mean "GNU General Public License version 2", and what the license
> is, is irrelevant to the discussion.
>
> > Debian GNU/Hurd uses net-tools I belive, but this conflicts with
> > inetutils. Maybe a solution would be to move hostname into
> > inetutils, where it really belongs. What do you think? I'll
> > happily do the move.
>
> My Gentoo box uses hostname/ifconfig from net-tools. What do you
> meant "conflicts?
>
> That you cannot install both packages because both provide the same
> tools (if not all, then some of the tools).
>
> I don't understand why should hostname move into inetutils.
>
> Because it is a "internet" tool.
>
> I don't know much about Hurd, but couldnt Hurd use hostaname from
> net-tools too?
>
> Yes, but then you can't use inetutils.
>
> I thought we just don't want to build coreutils's hostname on boxes
> where /usr/bin/hostname exists already or when the version from
> net-tools is know to perform better.
>
> Recall that coreutils doesn't only run on GNU-variants, it runs on a
> wide selection of operating systems. It would be quite possible that
> these systems would end up not having hostname. And net-tools (from
> the little I know about it) only supports GNU-variant systems like
> GNU/Linux and GNU/Hurd.
>
> It seems that the maintainer of net-tools is a GNU hacker, maybe it
> would be possible to merge net-tools with inetutils....
>
> Personally, if configure in coreutils would include a code to disable
> hostname based on certain criteria, I would be happy with that too.
>
> That is ugly, and it is impossible to figure out what this criteria
> is.
>
> Cheers.
Content-Description: Re: bug in hostname (fwd)
> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:02:59 -0500
> From: address@hidden (Paul Jarc)
> Subject: Re: bug in hostname
> To: "Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden>
> Cc: Martin MOKREJ? <address@hidden>,
> address@hidden, address@hidden
> Mail-followup-to: "Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden>,
> Martin MOKREJ? <address@hidden>,
> address@hidden, address@hidden
>
>
> "Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I don't understand why should hostname move into inetutils.
> >
> > Because it is a "internet" tool.
>
> Well, it has sort of become one. But Unix has had hostname longer
> than it has had networks, IIRC, and hostname does not do any network
> communication itself. I think coreutils is a fine place for hostname,
> but inetutils would be ok too.
>
> > Recall that coreutils doesn't only run on GNU-variants, it runs on a
> > wide selection of operating systems. It would be quite possible that
> > these systems would end up not having hostname.
>
> That doesn't seem very likely to me, but along the same lines, even
> though the system may already have one version of the command
> installed, people often install the GNU version because they like it
> better. Deciding which version should appear first in $PATH is a
> choice made by distributors, admins, and users, not the maintainers of
> the commands.
>
> > Personally, if configure in coreutils would include a code to disable
> > hostname based on certain criteria, I would be happy with that too.
> >
> > That is ugly, and it is impossible to figure out what this criteria
> > is.
>
> There is precedent for a ./configure option like --disable-hostname; I
> think that's the sort of thing Martin was talking about.
>
> But the best proposal I've heard so far is to merge the version from
> gettext into coreutils. That version supports all the options people
> have asked for, and its copyright is already assigned to the FSF.
>
>
> paul
Content-Description: Re: bug in hostname (fwd)
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:46:29 +0100 (MET)
> From: "Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden>
> To: address@hidden (Paul Jarc)
> CC: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden
> Subject: Re: bug in hostname
>
>
> > Personally, if configure in coreutils would include a code to
> > disable hostname based on certain criteria, I would be happy
> > with that too.
> >
> > That is ugly, and it is impossible to figure out what this
> > criteria is.
>
> There is precedent for a ./configure option like
> --disable-hostname; I think that's the sort of thing Martin was
> talking about.
>
> I understood it as having configure do some magic and see what the
> user wanted, if what you say is what Martin ment, then I see no
> problem with that.
>
> But the best proposal I've heard so far is to merge the version
> from gettext into coreutils. That version supports all the options
> people have asked for, and its copyright is already assigned to the
> FSF.
>
> Note that I'm not against this, I'm just against removing hostname
> from coreutils and not moving it into inetutils; or something similar.
>
> Cheers.
Content-Description: Re: bug in hostname (fwd)
> To: Martin MOKREJ? <address@hidden>
> Cc: "Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden>, address@hidden,
> address@hidden
> Subject: Re: bug in hostname
> From: address@hidden (Paul Jarc)
> Mail-Followup-To: Martin MOKREJ? <address@hidden>,
> "Alfred M. Szmidt" <address@hidden>, address@hidden,
> address@hidden
> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 00:45:43 -0500
>
>
> Martin MOKREJ? <address@hidden> wrote:
> > say: by default don't build hostname on Solaris, Irix, where else too?
>
> Defaults should be the same on all platforms, I'd say. Once the full
> featured hostname is incorporated into coreutils, I don't see any
> reason for it to get special treatment.
>
> >> But the best proposal I've heard so far is to merge the version
> >> from gettext into coreutils.
> >
> > So how about the above? I'm also for this solution. ;)
>
> >From what Jim and Bruno have been saying, it sounds like it's
> underway.
>
>
> paul
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: coreutils/hostname and net-tools/hostname |
|
Date: |
Sat, 3 Apr 2004 04:02:26 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i |
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 11:22:25AM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
> mails you forwarded). Bernd, do you have any objection to that?
i heared nothing on that issue yet. And I am not quite sure, what the
question is, here.
On debian the net-tools hostname command is packaged in its own package a
long time.
Greetings
Bernd
--
(OO) -- address@hidden --
( .. ) address@hidden,linux.de,debian.org} http://www.eckes.org/
o--o 1024D/E383CD7E address@hidden v:+497211603874 f:+497211603875
(O____O) When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl!
--- End Message ---
- Re: bug in hostname,
Martin MOKREJŠ <=