On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Tom Gundersen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:35 AM, Eric Bélanger <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Tom Gundersen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Eric Bélanger <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> It's been a while but are we doing the hostname provider idea? >>> >>> I don't have a strong opinion, but the provider makes sense to me. >>> Especially as there are many possible providers of hostname, and we >>> might change our minds about who provides it again in the future (none >>> of the options are especially nice imho)... >>> >>> I think someone objected to the idea on irc though, which is why I >>> stopped pushing it. >>> >>> -t >>> >> >> Since no-one seems very interested in the provider idea, I decided not >> to implement it. >> >> I just pushed inetutils-1.8-5 in testing with these changes: >> >> - Add full path and exec in domainname and dnsdomainname scripts >> - Add man page symlinks for domainname and dnsdomainname >> >> Please test and signoff. > > signoff x86_64 > > -t >
Anyone for i686?
