While that makes perfect sense, in this particular case there is no remote
logging; it's all local, so using the local name should suffice. But the
fact that glibc returns "arm-host" but uclibc gives "127.x.y.z" -- seems
to be strange to me. There is no DNS (no network), and /etc/hosts
contains 'arm-host' in there, so that *should* work. Could it be a uclibc
bug?
(NB: at this point I've swapped my systems over to glibc, but I'm happy to
help you debug on uclibc as long as you need).
-derek
On Thu, October 7, 2021 8:24 am, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
> and another one: why do we do this? Far too many systems are called
> "localhost" or some similar nonsense. So if we find indication this
> system is not properly identifying itself, we ask the resolver for its
> real name. Remember that a remote peer must be able to identify the
> host based on the hostname field, and putting nonsense into it isn't
> really helpful.
>
> Rainer
--
Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
[email protected] www.ihtfp.com
Computer and Internet Security Consultant
_______________________________________________
rsyslog mailing list
https://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/
What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards
NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad of
sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you DON'T LIKE
THAT.
