From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: Contents of /etc/hosts
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 22:25:10 +0200
Message-ID: <87lgxutyzd.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20161005183147.GA32276@jocasta.intra> <87zimi5z5h.fsf@gnu.org>
	<20161006005710.GA2352@jocasta.intra>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46367)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bu3bz-00048E-0X
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 16:25:19 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bu3bv-00036n-N8
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 16:25:18 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20161006005710.GA2352@jocasta.intra> (John Darrington's message
	of "Thu, 6 Oct 2016 02:57:10 +0200")
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: John Darrington <john@darrington.wattle.id.au>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Hello!

John Darrington <john@darrington.wattle.id.au> skribis:

> On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 10:17:14PM +0200, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
>      Hi!
>=20=20=20=20=20=20
>      John Darrington <john@darrington.wattle.id.au> skribis:
>=20=20=20=20=20=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=20=20=20=20=20
>      It???s not very useful to have ???localhost.localdomain???, is it?=
=20=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)"

Right.

But =E2=80=9Clocalhost.localdomain=E2=80=9D is kinda pointless no?  I=E2=80=
=99ve checked a few
systems and I=E2=80=99ve never seen that.  Typical desktop GNU/Linux instal=
ls
don=E2=80=99t have an FQDN and =E2=80=9Chostname -d=E2=80=9D doesn=E2=80=99=
t return one; that=E2=80=99s fine.

I think the current default is OK, but we should allow people to specify
an FQDN when there=E2=80=99s a meaningful one.

Thoughts?

Ludo=E2=80=99.