> the hostname, one being a syscall and the other being a sysctl. One
> could of course have the kernel print a message to the console about
> it, syslogd(8) would pick that up.
Yes, I was about to propose this, but then I thought: why? If we go this way,
then we should definitely also log an IP
"Crist J. Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How about just logging a sethostname(3) call?
Still doesn't help. There are (at least) two different ways of setting
the hostname, one being a syscall and the other being a sysctl. One
could of course have the kernel print a message to the console ab
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 11:09:24PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> "Crist J. Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 12:32:53PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > > It should also log a message if the hostname changes.
> > Should that be a responsibility of syslogd(8)
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2001 at 11:24:16AM +0200, Mark Murray wrote:
> > I don't agree with this change.
> >
> > hostname != name-that-IP-address-resolves-to.
>
> Dunno what you are talking about. That has nothing directly to do with
> this. No one is talking about forcing you to change your hostname.
On Sat, Jan 20, 2001 at 11:24:16AM +0200, Mark Murray wrote:
> I don't agree with this change.
>
> hostname != name-that-IP-address-resolves-to.
Dunno what you are talking about. That has nothing directly to do with
this. No one is talking about forcing you to change your hostname. The
patch jus
DHCP an IP address there. I would be HOPPING
mad if that caused my hostname and VPN to break.
M
> >Submitter-Id: current-users
> >Originator: Crist J. Clark
> >Organization:
> >Confidential: no
> >Synopsis: syslogd(8) does not update hostn
"Crist J. Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 12:32:53PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > It should also log a message if the hostname changes.
> Should that be a responsibility of syslogd(8) or hostname(1)?
I meant syslogd(8), but putting it in hostname(1) might mak
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 12:32:53PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I propose that syslogd(8) should reload the hostname with a
> > SIGHUP. I cannot think of any reason that one should not update the
> > hostname, but as I pointed out, there are reasons why one
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I propose that syslogd(8) should reload the hostname with a
> SIGHUP. I cannot think of any reason that one should not update the
> hostname, but as I pointed out, there are reasons why one would want
> that behavior.
It should also log a message if the hostname
>Submitter-Id: current-users
>Originator: Crist J. Clark
>Organization:
>Confidential: no
>Synopsis: syslogd(8) does not update hostname
>Severity: non-critical
>Priority: medium
>Category: bin
>Release:FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i
10 matches
Mail list logo