From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: John Darrington <john@darrington.wattle.id.au>
Subject: Re: Contents of /etc/hosts
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 02:57:10 +0200
Message-ID: <20161006005710.GA2352@jocasta.intra>
References: <20161005183147.GA32276@jocasta.intra>
 <87zimi5z5h.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND"
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50221)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <john@darrington.wattle.id.au>) id 1brwzy-00071X-CK
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 20:57:23 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <john@darrington.wattle.id.au>) id 1brwzw-0006xV-Cg
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 20:57:21 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87zimi5z5h.fsf@gnu.org>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Ludovic Court??s <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org


--d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 10:17:14PM +0200, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
     Hi!
    =20
     John Darrington <john@darrington.wattle.id.au> skribis:
    =20
     > So ... my recommendations:
     >
     > 1. We change /etc/hosts to read
     >
     >
     >  127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost=20
     >  ::1       localhost.localdomain localhost
     >
     >  127.0.0.2 gambrinus
    =20
     It???s not very useful to have ???localhost.localdomain???, is it? =20

Try doing this:  Put just a single line in your /etc/hosts:=20
127.0.0.1 localhost
then run "hostname -d"

You will get the answer "(none)"

I'm sure that will break some applications! =20

Now so long as there is also a canonical hostname in /etc/hosts this won't =
be
a problem.  But what about on my machine running bind?  Here all hostnames =
are
in the bind database and not in /etc/hosts (except for localhost).


     Also, shouldn???t we keep the same address for both names?
    =20
     Like:
    =20
       127.0.0.1 localhost
       ::1       localhost
       127.0.0.1 gambrinus
       ::1       gambrinus
    =20
     Or am I missing something?

Hmm.  I have never seen it done this way elsewhere, and I really wonder how=
 some
services will react if they discover that 127.0.0.1 is not called "localhos=
t"? =20
Or that one address is known by two names.  I think it possible they might=
=20
assume a security breach and refuse to work.  Kerberos is very fussy about =
such=20
things.

J'

--=20
Avoid eavesdropping.  Send strong encrypted email.
PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3=20
fingerprint =3D 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285  A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3
See http://sks-keyservers.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.


--d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iEYEARECAAYFAlf1oWYACgkQimdxnC3oJ7NawgCfeUAMk7cUSfbYXMjjEioXXdOD
LiwAnjMvqppnv18Mq4Zu4dLFse2qBDRb
=W7D5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND--