From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 056AC138330 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 07:13:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 758D921C170; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 07:12:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D64421C07E for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 07:12:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [46.246.47.167] (unknown [46.246.47.167]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zlg) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 74134340861 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 07:12:52 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20160822155808.GA16219@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <1471894124.32381.0.camel@gentoo.org> <20160822220925.GB18116@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <20160823195746.GA21460@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> From: Daniel Campbell Message-ID: <24d9469d-fa6f-ffde-797e-420eca01d2a1@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 00:12:40 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160823195746.GA21460@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="eMexipCMH4v675HWkrhDfosRQsKOpTOaQ" X-Archives-Salt: 711d9f69-7baa-4865-9116-181dd20415ab X-Archives-Hash: b6ea1abb2141437d782aa4f23caebf98 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --eMexipCMH4v675HWkrhDfosRQsKOpTOaQ Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="fxxEHeWfPPkx0Uf3GLjqho6KoeUfJFGqB" From: Daniel Campbell To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: <24d9469d-fa6f-ffde-797e-420eca01d2a1@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo References: <20160822155808.GA16219@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <1471894124.32381.0.camel@gentoo.org> <20160822220925.GB18116@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <20160823195746.GA21460@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> In-Reply-To: <20160823195746.GA21460@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> --fxxEHeWfPPkx0Uf3GLjqho6KoeUfJFGqB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 08/23/2016 12:57 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 02:45:20PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: >> Symlinking /proc into /etc/hostname is still useful because it not >> only handles container hostnames (keep in mind that two containers >> could share the same /etc), but it also covers cases where the >> hostname changes, and it doesn't require writing to etc (which in >> general shouldn't be used to store state). >> >> The people who are saying /etc/hostname shouldn't really exist are >> completely right. However, if for whatever reason we did want to >> provide it for compatibility (just like mtab), then a symlink to /proc= >> at least ensures it returns the same answer as the system call. >=20 > My understanding of /etc/hostname is it is a widely used standard for > storing the name of the host and it is used to set the name of the host= > on bootup. I just ran a google search of /etc/hostname, and it gets a > number of hits. >=20 > Here is what I'm looking at in OpenRC: >=20 > I am planning to change the logic in /etc/init.d/hostname so that if > /etc/hostname exists, the first word out of that file will be used as > the hostname rather than any setting in /etc/conf.d/hostname. If you > don't want /etc/hostname, just don't create it and the settings from > /etc/conf.d/hostname will still be used. >=20 > It turns out this has nothing to do with the Docker situation I brought= > up. Whether or not a docker container should be able to access the > hostname of the host it is running on is a separate question. >=20 > William >=20 That seems like a fair compromise. Those who want /etc/hostname get to use it, those who don't won't need to change anything. Will other packages be able to modify or create the file and thus jeopardize anything? --=20 Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 --fxxEHeWfPPkx0Uf3GLjqho6KoeUfJFGqB-- --eMexipCMH4v675HWkrhDfosRQsKOpTOaQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXvUjoAAoJEAEkDpRQOeFwUV4QAMgPfoV85ASKWY5P6cpnYtWi W2tbm6ME1sfvSKLmHNLJOwvqkwJWy1ahl9/l1Dz9NT+wUIq3vBwi8cYmNEnlq8OE g3ZM1zhgyorsZm83cPfLXiEqi0Zu7c42yHlPnHGVCVcTR9NvlWpD9JLHBWu32v4q Yx7KV5wb+SDpPL7vVf8rfhD3Ex6kXCImU4YGzPuDkKyN83ugshT9v6dd7utI8JPj i0CtKAA35/OHAcIgWAgSMIs7IZ0wl/4MGSRnpqVZWtdyx7fqf4+BHtCQa7Xg9W/X oGwxc4h9SzxbosIxoxp+R+KYeTm7fqNMOfZDGdmRBtPSoBFcQs5tph7CUjIFa9l+ mJ44EVGK4lFZxe5yFKZySQbNAFUuxYj7WN86WHblKUaGXWv9v2S6thtJz8O0mFXl epnv00n3HEfSR030OOY4kaerJeMDzUqSoyi4fVlhYTHyExnwGdNdC07QybivHkeP /5RhuLkuYPNkTHXjeg2d8xPoXnwFhD7ufvak1kXt9mtaDYlCcT21n9OJHi5we0/K 6rDe1lNpxhkw7xkVLFGY9hkYdQxdTuVMHce2sqz6COM0JaruIGfUv89wL/JYjlZM GzePaSbcVprk4BZ9PUKb/9/+YVe2HG42SkflerYXPRy4WLTKlBZL4e1sfi+AYNEd xgW3loeLBG39xXWQ0gAD =SfFD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --eMexipCMH4v675HWkrhDfosRQsKOpTOaQ--