[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#246892: marked as done (install: /etc/hosts does not make 127.0.0.1 resolve to localhost)



Your message dated Sat, 1 May 2004 20:20:57 -0700
with message-id <20040502032057.GA1589@darjeeling.triplehelix.org>
and subject line already fixed
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 2 May 2004 01:40:34 +0000
>From cmb@cmb.is-a-geek.org Sat May 01 18:40:34 2004
Return-path: <cmb@cmb.is-a-geek.org>
Received: from heisenberg.zen.co.uk [212.23.3.141] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1BK5y6-00060b-00; Sat, 01 May 2004 18:40:34 -0700
Received: from [82.68.130.78] (helo=localhost)
	by heisenberg.zen.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.30)
	id 1BK5y4-0000R9-Jb; Sun, 02 May 2004 01:40:32 +0000
Received: from cmb by localhost with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 1BK5y3-0007v2-00; Sun, 02 May 2004 02:40:31 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Chris Boyle <cmb@debian.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: install: /etc/hosts does not make 127.0.0.1 resolve to localhost
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.58
Date: Sun, 02 May 2004 02:40:31 +0100
Message-Id: <E1BK5y3-0007v2-00@localhost>
Sender: Chris Boyle <cmb@cmb.is-a-geek.org>
X-Originating-Heisenberg-IP: [82.68.130.78]
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level: 
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 1

Package: install
Severity: normal

The sarge installer writes an /etc/hosts file with a first line like
this. (N.B. I am reporting from another machine)

127.0.0.1	vimes	localhost

This may have been the case in earlier installers as well. The problem I
have with this is that many things expect a reverse lookup of 127.0.0.1
to return localhost. MySQL for example: if a user is allowed to log in
from localhost, and logs in over TCP from 127.0.0.1, they will appear to
come from e.g. vimes, which is not localhost, and access will be denied.

I realise there may have been a good reason for this, but other distros
include something like this:

# By the way, Arnt Gulbrandsen <agulbra@nvg.unit.no> says that 127.0.0.1
# should NEVER be named with the name of the machine.  It causes
# problems
# for some (stupid) programs, irc and reputedly talk. :^)
#

# For loopbacking.
127.0.0.1       localhost

...i.e. suggesting a machine name shouldn't be on that line *at all*,
let alone first. Please explain. :-)

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (990, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.4.26
Locale: LANG=en_GB, LC_CTYPE=en_GB

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 246892-done) by bugs.debian.org; 2 May 2004 03:20:59 +0000
>From joshk@triplehelix.org Sat May 01 20:20:59 2004
Return-path: <joshk@triplehelix.org>
Received: from smtp802.mail.sc5.yahoo.com [66.163.168.181] 
	by spohr.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1BK7XH-0004l5-00; Sat, 01 May 2004 20:20:59 -0700
Received: from unknown (HELO triplehelix.org) (edkwan@sbcglobal.net@68.126.190.63 with login)
  by smtp802.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 May 2004 03:20:58 -0000
Received: from darjeeling.triplehelix.org (darjeeling.wifi.triplehelix.org [192.168.0.7])
	by triplehelix.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EADA2DE8A
	for <246892-done@bugs.debian.org>; Sat,  1 May 2004 20:20:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from joshk by darjeeling.triplehelix.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 1BK7XF-0000Pn-00
	for <246892-done@bugs.debian.org>; Sat, 01 May 2004 20:20:57 -0700
Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 20:20:57 -0700
To: 246892-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: already fixed
Message-ID: <20040502032057.GA1589@darjeeling.triplehelix.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="FCuugMFkClbJLl1L"
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring
X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated
X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this
X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas
X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant
X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this
X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to <http://www.habeas.com/report/>.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
From: Joshua Kwan <joshk@triplehelix.org>
Delivered-To: 246892-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no 
	version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level: 
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 1


--FCuugMFkClbJLl1L
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

this bug was fixed in 0.63

--=20
Joshua Kwan

--FCuugMFkClbJLl1L
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://triplehelix.org/~joshk/pubkey_gpg.asc
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=q3f9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--FCuugMFkClbJLl1L--



Reply to: