Gnucash 2.4.0 (Windows)

[Geert Janssens]

On Friday 31 December 2010, David T. wrote:
> --- On Thu, 12/30/10, Mortimer <mortimer.hobart at gmail.com> wrote:
> > From: Mortimer <mortimer.hobart at gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: Gnucash 2.4.0 (Windows)
> > To: "Cam Ellison" <cam at ellisonet.ca>
> > Cc: gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> > Date: Thursday, December 30, 2010, 6:07 PM
> > On 12/30/2010 18:25, Cam Ellison
> > 
> > wrote:
> > > That's rather over the top.
> > > 
> > > Your machine's internal address is 127.0.0.1. 
> > 
> > That's a reserved
> > 
> > > address that cannot be used anywhere else.  I
> > 
> > think you'll find that
> > 
> > > some applications and routines native to Windows
> > 
> > actually make use of
> > 
> > > it - were I you, I would not be blocking access to
> > 
> > that address: you
> > 
> > > are likely to screw something else up by doing
> > 
> > so.  The many processes
> > 
> > > in the OS and applications need to be able to talk to
> > 
> > each other, and
> > 
> > > that address is one of them.
> > 
> > gnucash is the first program that has triggered any of my
> > firewalls by
> > asking to connect to 127.0.0.1, I have had one other
> > program that
> > requested to change LOCALHOST, not 127.0.0.1, so before now
> > I had no
> > idea that they were one and the same.
> > 
> > All I knew is that a program that had never requested
> > permission to use
> > the internet was all of a sudden calling to a (presumed)
> > remote IP,
> > tried to block it and the program failed to run.
> > 
> > > Asking questions is a good thing.
> > 
> > Yes it is. Esp when you can get a straight answer w/o snide
> > remarks. now
> 
> Mortimer--
> 
> Unfortunately, you've been the one with attitude in this. Gnucash is not
> engaging in nefarious underhanded subterfuge, and we've been trying to
> explain to you what is going on and why. YOU'VE been the one throwing up
> smoke.
> 
> Perhaps you might read the following.
> 
> https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Localhost
> 
> It clearly explains the connection between LOCALHOST and 127.0.0.1.
> 
Unfortunately my real life experience shows this is not true for (at least 
some versions of) Microsoft Windows. For some incomprehensible reason 
Microsoft has decided localhost should refer to the IP address of your primary 
network adapter. This was also discovered in the bug that was mentioned 
earlier in this thread.

This strange decision on Microsoft's behalf has caused us quite some commotion 
already...

Geert