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 <[email protected]> > 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
