Il giorno mer, 09-02-2005 alle 20:58 +0100, Oliver Siegmar ha scritto:
> It is a brand new sarge installation - I haven't tweaked anything.
> So...everyone will get this error in the first place if he/she doesn't
> configure anything manually, right?
>
> At least the installation script should perform a 'hostname -f' or something
> to avoid this kind of errors and to enable visible_hostname by itself.
What would you suggest it'd be a reasonable value for visible_hostname
if there's no FQDN set?
grave
makes the package in question unusable or mostly so, or causes
data loss, or introduces a security hole allowing access to the
accounts of users who use the package.
Do you see this bug makeing the package unusable or causing data loss or
introducing a security hole?
Il giorno mer, 09-02-2005 alle 20:58 +0100, Oliver Siegmar ha scritto:
> It is a brand new sarge installation - I haven't tweaked anything.
> So...everyone will get this error in the first place if he/she doesn't
> configure anything manually, right?
>
> At least the installation script should perform a 'hostname -f' or something
> to avoid this kind of errors and to enable visible_hostname by itself.
What would you suggest it'd be a reasonable value for visible_hostname
if there's no FQDN set?
> So I think it is a grave bug.
From rom http:// www.debian. org/Bugs/ Developer. en.html
grave
makes the package in question unusable or mostly so, or causes
data loss, or introduces a security hole allowing access to the
accounts of users who use the package.
Do you see this bug makeing the package unusable or causing data loss or
introducing a security hole?
Regards,
--
Luigi Gangitano -- <email address hidden> -- <email address hidden>
GPG: 1024D/924C0C26: 12F8 9C03 89D3 DB4A 9972 C24A F19B A618 924C 0C26