Re: Should we drop the fully qualified server name requirement?

On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Henrik Nordstrom
<henrik_at_henriknordstrom.net> wrote:
> Squid has since forever insisted on the local server name to be a fully
> qualified hostname. However, in most cases this does not really matter
> and is a big headache for less experienced admins.
>
> Is there really any reason to keep this as a strict requirement, or
> should we downgrade it to just a logged warning? I vote for turning
> this into a warning..

I'd rather keep it as is. If necessary I'd rather turn the fatal
message to something more explicative if it's not clear enough.

-- 
    /kinkie