| 1 |
> because net.lo is not usefull for a system that provides services. |
| 2 |
> for example running a ssh server for net.lo is kinda silly :) |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Maybe we should all remove the localhost line from /etc/hosts if it's silly. |
| 5 |
Maybe /etc/fstab should be /etc/conf.d/filesystems? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> > I'm asking this because last week at home I couldn't run apache2 |
| 8 |
> > because I didn't have an interface up but lo. But this is silly, |
| 9 |
> > because I could still use apache2 locally! |
| 10 |
> > Am I wrong? Is my system wrong? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Your system is correct, if you don't care for this you can change the |
| 13 |
> behaviour in /etc/conf.d/rc with the RC_NET_STRICT_CHECKING variable |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Or maybe its should be left to the app. adding RC_NET_STRICT_CHECKING would |
| 16 |
have other consequences. One size does not fit all here. If net.lo is the |
| 17 |
only thing that satisfies net on a given system and the process doesnt have a |
| 18 |
problem attaching to that (as I just verified with both sshd and apache2), |
| 19 |
then let it be. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
What if you have apache setup SPECIFICALLY to attach to 127.0.0.1 so as to not |
| 22 |
be publicly accessible? I've done this numerous times in the past for |
| 23 |
various reasons. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
If it fails at init, it would be logical to check the logfile for the app and |
| 26 |
you'd quickly know what was wrong instead of having to mail a list. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Sorry to go off on this, but things have been changing in the last few months |
| 29 |
in ways illogical to me. I've been running gentoo since pre 1.0 days and |
| 30 |
this has greatly concerned me lately. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Every distro has it's quirks and funny ways of doing things, but the list |
| 33 |
seems to be growing with gentoo for no good reason. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Dave Crane |
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives