Re: where is /etc/hosts supposed to come from?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: where is /etc/hosts supposed to come from?
- From: Petter Reinholdtsen <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2010 23:21:00 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <20091229004740.GA26404@xvii.vinc17.org> <20091229045603.GA5130@dario.dodds.net> <20091229163823.GA2731@el.arwanta.net> <20091229213406.GB7527@xvii.vinc17.org> <20091230173112.GD18722@khazad-dum.debian.net> <20091231130236.GC6143@xvii.vinc17.org> <20091231131046.GA28362@glandium.org> <20091231140425.GF6143@xvii.vinc17.org> <39349130-4D0B-4081-BB81-E34E7DA11FAA@jeremiahfoster.com> <20091231153558.GB30834@teal.hq.k1024.org>
> the FQDN should be available directly on the host, without external
> dependencies. Which is why I personally think the machine name (the
> one that the kernel knows) should hold the canonical name.
I agree, and I always make sure /etc/hostname is the FQDN or something
close to it on machines I run.
We do the same at the university where I work, on all Unix versions
that are capable of storing the long names (had some problems with
older HP-UX, not sure we have any Unix versions left which refused
hostnames >8 characters).