On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 02:47:56PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > This is not clear. It should explicitly say that the FQDN (as > returned by the -f option) may not be part of this list. It > should also explicitly say that the returned FQDNs may be local, > thus may not be unique across all machines on the Internet: the > usual definition of a FQDN[*] implies that it is unique.
Feel free to send a patch, I'm certainly open to making the documentation clearer. > Because of the issues mentioned above, the sentence "See the warnings > in section THE FQDN above, and avoid using this option; use hostname > --all-fqdns instead." for --fqdn must be removed. That I don't understand. > For instance, to generate the right-end part of a message-id, it is > much better to use the --fqdn option rather the --all-fqdns one. Point. > Because this is a particular case: there are 2^24 IP addresses, and > no-one would expect all these addresses by using this function. Right, I'm not arguing that. I'm just explaining what's happening. > But /etc/hosts isn't part of the DNS (see the hosts(5) man page). > This why dig, which is a "DNS lookup utility", doesn't use it. > So, if you take /etc/hosts entries into account and say > "reverse *DNS* entry", you are lying. Relax! Either we're talking about improving software or we insult each other. If you prefer the latter please look for a different place as I will not play this game. Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org