Re: hosts, resolv setup?
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 07:33:12PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 01:56:01PM +0100, Norbert Nemec wrote:
>
> > In the same way, the name in /etc/hostname should not be used for
> > identification either. On a plain unix machine without additional software
> > for authentification etc., there simply is no way to identify a "machine".
> > You can only speak of IP-Adresses, DNS-Names and the like.
>
> You are correct in that /etc/hostname should not be used by most programs, as
> it is not the authoritative source for the system hostname. However, you are
> incorrect in asserting that unix-like systems do not have a concept of a
> single, canonical hostname. There is one, accessed via the gethostname(2) and
> sethostname(2) system calls. That hostname, unqualified, should generally
> resolve to one or more addresses that may be used to contact this host.
OK, that would mean, there really is a single machine-wide authoritative host
name, but that is still no FQDN! Therefore the command 'dnsdomainname' does not
really have any deep meaning. It might return some helpful information but you
cannot depend on it at all.
That's what I meant: the hostname simply does not have any meaning at all
outside the machine itself.
--
-- ______________________________________________________
-- JESUS CHRIST IS LORD!
-- To Him, even that machine here has to obey...
--
-- _________________________________Norbert "Nobbi" Nemec
-- Hindenburgstr. 44 ... D-91054 Erlangen ... Germany
-- eMail: <nobbi@cheerful.com> Tel: +49-(0)-9131-204180
Reply to: