Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:40:03 GMT From: Andy Kosela <akosela@andykosela.com> To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior Message-ID: <200907280840.n6S8e33A050121@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR standards/137173; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Andy Kosela <akosela@andykosela.com> To: wollman@csail.mit.edu Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: standards/137173: `uname -n` incorrect behavior Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:17:29 +0200 Garrett Wollman <wollman@csail.mit.edu> wrote: > <<On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:26:24 GMT, Andy Kosela <akosela@andykosela.com> said: > > > Currently `uname -n` prints the name of the system (FQDN) to standard output. I believe this is incorrect behavior according to IEEE Std 1003.1. > > > -n > > Write the name of this node within an implementation-defined communications network. > > What makes you think that the behavior of "uname -n" does not match > this description? Hi Garrett, All UNIX systems I got access to prints only hostname without the domain information (same as 'hostname -s'). Is this some historical peculiarity of FreeBSD? I see it uses KERN_HOSTNAME which is indeed FQDN. On top of that common sense tells me that "node within an implementation-defined communications network" is just a node name, and not a full domain name information. What you think? --Andy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200907280840.n6S8e33A050121>