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 80BA1138330 for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 04:12:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1ECE721C08C; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 04:12:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blaine.gmane.org (unknown [195.159.176.226]) (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 3282221C012 for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 04:11:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bcm1C-0001vk-Tn for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 06:11:54 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 04:11:49 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20160822155808.GA16219@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <1471894124.32381.0.camel@gentoo.org> <20160822220925.GB18116@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <20160823195746.GA21460@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> <24d9469d-fa6f-ffde-797e-420eca01d2a1@gentoo.org> <45fe53a7-626f-62af-398c-2397aedb3064@gentoo.org> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org User-Agent: Pan/0.141 (Tarzan's Death; GIT 04f6c8932) X-Archives-Salt: 11b85d45-d656-4cb8-834a-c69d36ea10a1 X-Archives-Hash: baa1193890f9a642a573c8b7a32b183a Mike Gilbert posted on Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:49:42 -0400 as excerpted: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Michael Orlitzky > wrote: >> On 08/24/2016 07:37 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote: >>> >>> I imagine _someone_ out there wants it, otherwise we wouldn't be >>> discussing it. >> >> The thread started out proposing it as a solution to a docker problem >> that, it turns out, isn't a problem. Why are we still trying to fixing >> something that isn't broken? Maybe I'm losing it, but nowhere in the >> whole thread has anyone given a single reason why this might be useful. > > You're right that the orignal purpose of the change has been debunked. > > So, starting over: one real benefit would be cross-compatibility with > systemd. It's one less thing people would need to reconfigure when > migrating to/from openrc. > > And before anyone starts an argument about it, I don't care what your > opinion on systemd is. I'm just throwing this out there as an actual > benefit of adding support for /etc/hostname to openrc. Are you sure about systemd? Because I'm on systemd here, working fine as far as can be observed, and I don't have /etc/hostname. [after googling and checking manpages] Seems it's (semi-?)optional. The hostnamectl command can be used to set the hostname (pretty/static/transient/or-combination-of) among other things, and /etc/hostname presumably controls the static name. But I have the (reported as transient) name set by kconfig option, and apparently that's all that's needed on my setup, anyway. So it seems systemd works just fine without /etc/hostname, certainly so if it's set elsewhere, like say via kconfig option. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman