>>>>> "A" == Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mailed me:
A> On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 11:06:12AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
>> If /etc/mailname is the same as /etc/hostname, can I remove
>> /etc/mailname perhaps one day? Both say jidanni.org .
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 11:08:52AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But this second configuration requires the network and will fail in
> > the case that you have taken it offline. On laptops that is not a
> > desireable situation. Even in the desktop environme
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 07:44:20PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 10:55:13AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > On a laptop with a sometimes disconnected PCMCIA network card you
> > might find this very inconvenient. The first configuration above will
> > always use the loopback
Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But this second configuration requires the network and will fail in
> the case that you have taken it offline. On laptops that is not a
> desireable situation. Even in the desktop environment there are cases
You can solve that by adding the external add
On 2003-05-31 10:55:13, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Why do you say it is broken? What apps will it break?
Applications using omniorb, for instance, breaks with this config per
ther mailing list.
/Allan
--
Allan Wind
P.O. Box 2022
Woburn, MA 01888-0022
USA
pgpsIhr4xgLeH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 10:55:13AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> On a laptop with a sometimes disconnected PCMCIA network card you
> might find this very inconvenient. The first configuration above will
> always use the loopback address and will always be able to talk to
> itself even if the network
Balazs GAL wrote:
> Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
>
> > (from /etc/hosts)
> > 127.0.0.1 bohr.local bohr localhost
> > 192.168.65.5bohr.local bohr
>
> This is a broken setup, and it will break many apps.
> Use it only, if you really _should_ use it as a workaround.
Why do you say it is brok
2003-05-30, p keltezéssel Anthony DeRobertis ezt írta:
> (from /etc/hosts)
> 127.0.0.1 bohr.local bohr localhost
> 192.168.65.5bohr.local bohr
This is a broken setup, and it will break many apps.
Use it only, if you really _should_ use it as a workaround.
The right one:
127.0.0.1
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 08:52:07PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 10:20, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > However, I've seen problems caused by the use of the short name only in
> > /etc/hostname (mostly mail-related, maybe?) and I systematically change
On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 10:20, Steve Langasek wrote:
> However, I've seen problems caused by the use of the short name only in
> /etc/hostname (mostly mail-related, maybe?) and I systematically change
> this to hold the FQDN on my systems. Haven't filed a bug about this,
> b
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 09:20:34AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> However, I've seen problems caused by the use of the short name only in
> /etc/hostname (mostly mail-related, maybe?) and I systematically change
Most MTA's (at least: sendmail, postfix and exim) has options in con
On May 29, "Nikita V. Youshchenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Should /etc/hostname contain only short hostname, or FQDN name?
As you can see from the other replies, this is mostly a matters of
taste and religion.
I do not know about any definitive standard for this matter.
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 09:20:34AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > Should /etc/hostname contain only short hostname, or FQDN name?
> > > Is this documented anywhere?
>
> > > I've always thougth that /etc/hostname should contain short hostname.
> > &g
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 03:43:56PM +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> Should /etc/hostname contain only short hostname, or FQDN name?
> Is this documented anywhere?
There is no real standard on this. Both is possible. Most Software works
like this:
- if you need a unqualified hostnam
Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> Should /etc/hostname contain only short hostname, or FQDN name?
> Is this documented anywhere?
A religous argument. Some like it one way and some like it the other
way. Be prepared for a long discussion thread.
> I've always thougth that /etc/h
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 09:20:34AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> However, I've seen problems caused by the use of the short name only in
> /etc/hostname (mostly mail-related, maybe?) and I systematically change
> this to hold the FQDN on my systems. Haven't filed a bug about
[Nikita V. Youshchenko]
> Should /etc/hostname contain only short hostname, or FQDN name?
> Is this documented anywhere?
I prefer the FQDN as hostname. It make it easier to report the
correct name in scripts when administrating large installations.
Some unix-types do not handle FQDN as ho
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 02:35:03PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 03:43:56PM +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > Should /etc/hostname contain only short hostname, or FQDN name?
> > Is this documented anywhere?
> > I've always thougth that /e
Nikita V. Youshchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Should /etc/hostname contain only short hostname, or FQDN name?
[rest snipped, no answers for that.]
The short name.
cu andreas
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 03:43:56PM +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> Should /etc/hostname contain only short hostname, or FQDN name?
> Is this documented anywhere?
>
> I've always thougth that /etc/hostname should contain short hostname.
> But e.g. etherconf package
Hello
Should /etc/hostname contain only short hostname, or FQDN name?
Is this documented anywhere?
I've always thougth that /etc/hostname should contain short hostname.
But e.g. etherconf package puts FQDN name there ...
21 matches
Mail list logo
