Is there a limit on line length in FreeBSD's /etc/hosts?
I'm not finding any mention of such a limit in hosts(5), but
characters beyond the first 660 or so seem to be ignored.
To answer the inevitable followup why would anyone need such
a long line in /etc/hosts:
With this line in /etc
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 01:57:48 -0700, Perry Hutchison wrote:
I can easily suppress access to unwanted web sites by adding
names to the localhost line in /etc/hosts, like this:
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.my.domain bad1.com bad2.com ...
My version of that line has gotten rather long
On 27 Mar 2013, at 09:57, per...@pluto.rain.com (Perry Hutchison) wrote:
Is there a limit on line length in FreeBSD's /etc/hosts?
I'm not finding any mention of such a limit in hosts(5), but
characters beyond the first 660 or so seem to be ignored.
To answer the inevitable followup why
Hi,
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:09:29 +0100
Erik Nørgaard norga...@locolomo.org wrote:
On 27 Mar 2013, at 09:57, per...@pluto.rain.com (Perry Hutchison)
wrote:
Is there a limit on line length in FreeBSD's /etc/hosts?
I'm not finding any mention of such a limit in hosts(5), but
characters
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 01:57:48 -0700, Perry Hutchison wrote:
Is there a limit on line length in FreeBSD's /etc/hosts?
I'm not finding any mention of such a limit in hosts(5), but characters
beyond the first 660 or so seem to be ignored.
To answer the inevitable followup why would anyone
Hello
My problem: sendmail skipping /etc/host and use MX record. Somebody
have any ide how use sendmail /etc/host file?
Dec 9 20:58:23 www sm-mta[29438]: oB9Fxmx0027174:
to=sdg...@sdaffd.hu, delay=03:58:35, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=esmtp,
pri=1313137, relay=mail.mouseoleum.hu., dsn=4.0.0,
, send any mail to
freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Could you clarify in regards to what you want sendmail to actually use
/etc/host for?
If your intent is to re-map where mail destined for a given host/domain goes
- (ie override DNS MX records) - then /etc/hosts is not going to do what
On Saturday 06 June 2009 20:44:38 Tim Judd wrote:
On 6/4/09, Peter fb...@peterk.org wrote:
I do not think /etc/hosts does round robin, I always assumed first match
wins...DNS/bind I would understand...
It's the same library call: gethostbyname(3) and friends.
Why does ping always return
On 6/4/09, Peter fb...@peterk.org wrote:
On Thursday 04 June 2009 20:48:21 Peter wrote:
iH,
This all started with NFS not mounting at bootso, testing in VMs:
snip
Why is ping using one IP, and ssh/mount_nfs/showmount using another IP
from /etc/hosts?
Q: Where is described that name
=NO
rpcbind_enable=NO
sshd_enable=YES
client# ifconfig em0|grep inet
inet 172.20.6.2 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 172.20.6.255
inet 116.23.45.2 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 116.23.45.255
client# cat /etc/hosts
::1 localhost localhost.test
127.0.0.1 localhost
On Thursday 04 June 2009 20:48:21 Peter wrote:
iH,
This all started with NFS not mounting at bootso, testing in VMs:
snip
Why is ping using one IP, and ssh/mount_nfs/showmount using another IP
from /etc/hosts?
Q: Where is described that name resolution for A or PTR records should
On Thursday 04 June 2009 20:48:21 Peter wrote:
iH,
This all started with NFS not mounting at bootso, testing in VMs:
snip
Why is ping using one IP, and ssh/mount_nfs/showmount using another IP
from /etc/hosts?
Q: Where is described that name resolution for A or PTR records should
) and put the
IP into /etc/hosts with a hostname?
Reason for asking
Firewall rules needs refreshing after new IP
Possible answers:
Create dhcp-exit-hooks (undocumented?) in /etc like so:
#!/bin/sh
if [ ! -z $new_ip_address ]; then
IP=`ifconfig WAN | grep 'inet' | grep -v 'inet6' | cut -f 2 -d
into /etc/hosts with a hostname?
Reason for asking
Firewall rules needs refreshing after new IP
Possible answers:
Create dhcp-exit-hooks (undocumented?) in /etc like so:
#!/bin/sh
if [ ! -z $new_ip_address ]; then
IP=`ifconfig WAN | grep 'inet' | grep -v 'inet6' | cut -f 2 -d
FreeBSD7.1. One nic is LAN and the other dynamical
IP from ISP.
Question: What is the canonical way for catching the IP address from a
DHCP assigned nic (from ISP that doesn't set hostname) and put the IP
into /etc/hosts with a hostname?
Reason for asking
Firewall rules needs refreshing
dynamical
IP from ISP.
Question: What is the canonical way for catching the IP address from a
DHCP assigned nic (from ISP that doesn't set hostname) and put the IP
into /etc/hosts with a hostname?
Reason for asking
Firewall rules needs refreshing after new IP
Possible answers:
Create dhcp-exit
.
Question: What is the canonical way for catching the IP address from a
DHCP assigned nic (from ISP that doesn't set hostname) and put the IP
into /etc/hosts with a hostname?
Reason for asking
Firewall rules needs refreshing after new IP
Possible answers:
Create dhcp-exit-hooks (undocumented
is the canonical way for catching the IP address from a DHCP
assigned nic (from ISP that doesn't set hostname) and put the IP into
/etc/hosts with a hostname?
man dhclient.conf
you can specify your script that will be started on changes, but i won't
tell you ready-to-use example because i never needed
.
Dualhomed firewalled FreeBSD7.1. One nic is LAN and the other dynamical
IP from ISP.
Question: What is the canonical way for catching the IP address from a
DHCP assigned nic (from ISP that doesn't set hostname) and put the IP
into /etc/hosts with a hostname?
Reason for asking
Firewall rules needs
Hi,
I am trying to redirect a URL request to a different address but it appears
that /etc/hosts is not doing the job. Example:
127.0.0.1 google.com
The way I understand it is that by typing google.com in a web browser it
should result in the local page being displayed. It instead goes
David Naylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am trying to redirect a URL request to a different address but it appears
that /etc/hosts is not doing the job. Example:
127.0.0.1 google.com
The way I understand it is that by typing google.com in a web browser it
should result in the local
Subject: /etc/hosts not working
* PGP Signed: 09/11/08 at 13:49:05
Hi,
I am trying to redirect a URL request to a different address
but it appears
that /etc/hosts is not doing the job. Example
David Naylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am trying to redirect a URL request to a different address but it
appears that /etc/hosts is not doing the job. Example:
127.0.0.1 google.com
The way I understand it is that by typing google.com in a web browser
it should result in the local
`ping google.com' actually pings 127.0.0.1 but `host google' returns
the actual IP addresses for google.
ping will resolve the name using the mecanism defined in
/etc/nsswitch.conf, usually:
hosts: files dns nis
try first /etc/hosts, then DNS, then NIS
But host(1) command is designed
On Sep 1, 2008, at 8:10 PM, Glenn Sieb wrote:
Tom Marchand said the following on 9/1/08 7:52 PM:
Hi,
I've got an issue where hosts defined in my /etc/hosts are not being
resolved. I've looked at resolv.conf, host.conf and nsswitch.conf
and
everything looks ok. It's my understanding
Derek Ragona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What error are you getting from ping?
I think the OP said he did not have a problem with ping.
--
Sahil Tandon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Hi,
I've got an issue where hosts defined in my /etc/hosts are not being
resolved. I've looked at resolv.conf, host.conf and nsswitch.conf and
everything looks ok. It's my understanding that with the below
configurations, /etc/hosts should be used first then DNS. Correct
Tom Marchand said the following on 9/1/08 7:52 PM:
Hi,
I've got an issue where hosts defined in my /etc/hosts are not being
resolved. I've looked at resolv.conf, host.conf and nsswitch.conf and
everything looks ok. It's my understanding that with the below
configurations, /etc/hosts should
At 06:52 PM 9/1/2008, Tom Marchand wrote:
Hi,
I've got an issue where hosts defined in my /etc/hosts are not being
resolved. I've looked at resolv.conf, host.conf and nsswitch.conf and
everything looks ok. It's my understanding that with the below
configurations, /etc/hosts should be used
wrote:
Tom Marchand said the following on 9/1/08 7:52 PM:
Hi,
I've got an issue where hosts defined in my /etc/hosts are not being
resolved. I've looked at resolv.conf, host.conf and nsswitch.conf
and
everything looks ok. It's my understanding that with the below
configurations, /etc/hosts
Everything is set correctly in rc.conf. What I have noticed is that
ping can resolve hosts from /etc/hosts. I should mention that this
machine has been running for 1.5 years and it wasn't until today that
I've needed to add machines to /etc/hosts.
On Sep 1, 2008, at 8:22 PM, Derek
Tom Marchand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everything is set correctly in rc.conf. What I have noticed is that
ping can resolve hosts from /etc/hosts.
If ping works then everything is fine in /etc/hosts. You haven't told us
what program you're using to resolve
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 23:49:53 -0800 (PST)
RSean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys,
Just curious if anyone has tried regular expressions to handle ads and
banners.
That's what adzap and similar squid filters do.
___
.
These rules very efficiently block ads and banners at the gateway, saving
b/w and improving surfing experience.
Just thought I should mention this.
Cheers!
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/performance-impact-of-large--etc-hosts-files-tp14267018p14493715.html
Sent from the freebsd
Hi,
Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 04:06:01 Erich Dollansky wrote:
There's no clean solutions to getting different lookups per-user that
Both ipfw and pf support tables, which is what you
I would like to avoid having a fire wall running on each machine.
Out of
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 10:05:28 Erich Dollansky wrote:
The beauty is, Internet feels still faster then before.
It has one advantage over all those ad removal tools. It filters what I
do not like. It has nothing to do with censorship, it just gets rid of
all the crap hanging around on
Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 04:06:01 Erich Dollansky wrote:
There's no clean solutions to getting different lookups per-user that
I
The clen solution is hosts.
But hosts is operating system-wide.
Both ipfw and pf support tables, which is what you
, a
firewall solution as Nikos was proposing.
I have zero experience of squid beyond reading about it, but it has
always sounded like a major resource hog. Perhaps just running one
plugin to do just this would be OK?
The advantage of /etc/hosts is simplicity. For a small home network of
BSD
Am Mittwoch, 12. Dezember 2007 13:01:14 schrieb Alex Zbyslaw:
snip explanation
I don't see how a firewall is appropriate for this (hosts.allow,
likewise). The point of the exercise is to never even contact the ad host.
Transparent proxy with squid on the firewall? There's even plugins to
Erich Dollansky wrote:
Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Erich Dollansky wrote:
Assuming I've understood your initial post correctly, then I do the
same, redirecting some dozen ad sites to a local web server. With a
this is how I started. Then friends did the same. We exchanged the
files. We added
of the exercise is not that apparent to everybody.
If I've misunderstood something about your approach, please enlighten
me.
You misunderstood something, just because you and some people do it,
does is it make it the legitimate usage of /etc/hosts?
That's not the apparent usage of /etc/hosts to everyone
Am Mittwoch, 12. Dezember 2007 13:38:59 schrieben Sie:
I want to do precisely the opposite. It should affect only a single
machine. It would even be better if it would affect only a single
account on that machine.
Affecting only a single machine/a single account has nothing to do with the
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:31:08 +
Alex Zbyslaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have zero experience of squid beyond reading about it, but it has
always sounded like a major resource hog.
It depends how you use it. I think you can probably get it down to
about 15 MB, if you eliminate memory
problem, but it still seems *to me* far more work than dumping a bunch
of hostnames in /etc/hosts. I have, myself, had little or no trouble
with page layouts messing up, but I maybe haven't used the solution on a
large enough scale to notice. But if you really want to configure the
heck out
RW wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:31:08 +
Alex Zbyslaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have zero experience of squid beyond reading about it, but it has
always sounded like a major resource hog.
It depends how you use it. I think you can probably get it down to
about 15 MB, if you
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Erich Dollansky wrote:
If you still see unwanted content, just add a line and it will be gone during
your next visit.
Like AdBlockPlus, only more work.
The beauty is, Internet feels still faster then before.
Like AdblockPlus.
It has one advantage over all those ad
Warren Block wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Erich Dollansky wrote:
If you still see unwanted content, just add a line and it will be
gone during your next visit.
Like AdBlockPlus, only more work.
The beauty is, Internet feels still faster then before.
Like AdblockPlus.
It has one
Hi,
Warren Block wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Erich Dollansky wrote:
If you still see unwanted content, just add a line and it will be gone
during your next visit.
Like AdBlockPlus, only more work.
The beauty is, Internet feels still faster then before.
Like AdblockPlus.
It has one
to be dropped in a few
months.
The other schemes mentioned in this thread (hosts, DNS, squid) work with any
and every web browser. The OP already said he doesn't use Firefox.
Guess I missed that. Having tried 127.0.0.1 entries in /etc/hosts and
squid in an company setting, Adblock is so much easier
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:05:53 -0700 (MST)
Warren Block [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It may be possible to use an Adblock subscription to update a squid
setup. That would provide the best of both.
There's no need to do that, you can use a script like adzapper with
squid. It's in ports
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 09:10:15PM +, RW wrote:
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:05:53 -0700 (MST)
Warren Block [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It may be possible to use an Adblock subscription to update a squid
setup. That would provide the best of both.
There's no need to do that, you can use
Am Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2007 06:52:41 schrieb Gary Kline:
well, thi sounded great until I read squid. Isn't that
something to do with FBSD and Windows? If not, how hard is squid
to install; what does it do?
You're probably thinking of samba, which is an implementation
On Tuesday 11 December 2007 05:18:40 Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
I wonder what the performance impact of the entries in /etc/hosts really
is.
What is your experience?
Google tells me a lot of hosts running FreeBSD but I could not find
anything regarding the hosts file itself.
I use hosts
Hi,
Nikos Vassiliadis wrote:
On Tuesday 11 December 2007 05:18:40 Erich Dollansky wrote:
I use hosts for filtering all unwanted content on my personal machine.
That's not apparent. What are your filtering?
all the sites I personally do not want to see.
and how do your filter using /etc
And it just occured to me that you really
mean /etc/hosts.allow and not /etc/hosts...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
on Firefox. Easier to use and
more effective than 127.0.0.1 entries in /etc/hosts.
-Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota USA
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send
://adblockplus.org/en/ works fine on Firefox. Easier to use and
more effective than 127.0.0.1 entries in /etc/hosts.
I do not even use Firefox.
hosts has the clear limit that stuff coming from the same site as the
text I want to read is still shown.
In general, it works fine.
But new sites have new
Erich Dollansky wrote:
But new sites have new stuff I would like to be filtered out. To make
these experiences as rare as possible, I collect from friends and the
Internet hosts files to filter as much as possible.
This resulted in a pretty large file meanwhile.
But the Internet looks much
Hi,
Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
Erich Dollansky wrote:
Assuming I've understood your initial post correctly, then I do the
same, redirecting some dozen ad sites to a local web server. With a
this is how I started. Then friends did the same. We exchanged the
files. We added hosts files from the
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 04:06:01 Erich Dollansky wrote:
There's no clean solutions to getting different lookups per-user that
I
The clen solution is hosts.
But hosts is operating system-wide.
Both ipfw and pf support tables, which is what you
want, large sets or unrelated
Hi,
I wonder what the performance impact of the entries in /etc/hosts really is.
What is your experience?
Google tells me a lot of hosts running FreeBSD but I could not find
anything regarding the hosts file itself.
I use hosts for filtering all unwanted content on my personal machine.
I
in my hosts file, I have a line that looks like this:
::1localhost localhost.mydomain.com
Is this line for IPv6 or is there some other reason for its presence? It
causes occasional problems, so I commented it out and I kept a similar line
that points to 127.0.0.1
An
in my hosts file, I have a line that looks like this:
::1localhost localhost.mydomain.com
Is this line for IPv6 or is there some other reason for its presence? It
causes occasional problems, so I commented it out and I kept a similar line
that points to 127.0.0.1
there
On Wednesday 12 September 2007 15:47:15 Wojciech Puchar wrote:
in my hosts file, I have a line that looks like this:
::1localhost localhost.mydomain.com
Is this line for IPv6 or is there some other reason for its presence? It
causes occasional problems, so I
At 11:08 AM 9/12/2007, Pollywog wrote:
On Wednesday 12 September 2007 15:47:15 Wojciech Puchar wrote:
in my hosts file, I have a line that looks like this:
::1localhost localhost.mydomain.com
Is this line for IPv6 or is there some other reason for its presence? It
On Wednesday 12 September 2007 16:10:54 Derek Ragona wrote:
Are you running ipv6? If not just comment that line out.
I am not running ipv6 and I thought I did not need that line, so I have
commented it out.
thanks
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:33:24 +
Pollywog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in my hosts file, I have a line that looks like this:
::1localhost localhost.mydomain.com
Is this line for IPv6 or is there some other reason for its
presence? It causes occasional problems, so I
.
apollo# cat /etc/hosts
#::1localhost.mydomain.com localhost
127.0.0.1 localhost.mydomain.com localhost
10.20.30.199apollo.mydomain.com apollo
10.20.30.199apollo.mydomain.com.
Is this something that's required for other IP addresses
What is the second line with 10.20.30.199, and the hostname ends in a
period? I've never seen this in a host file previous to FBSD v.6.
apollo# cat /etc/hosts
#::1localhost.mydomain.com localhost
127.0.0.1 localhost.mydomain.com localhost
10.20.30.199
At 03:48 PM 4/10/2007, L33T Networks wrote:
What is the second line with 10.20.30.199, and the hostname ends in a
period? I've never seen this in a host file previous to FBSD v.6.
apollo# cat /etc/hosts
#::1localhost.mydomain.com localhost
127.0.0.1
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 15:52:43 -0500
Derek Ragona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 03:48 PM 4/10/2007, L33T Networks wrote:
What is the second line with 10.20.30.199, and the hostname ends in a
period? I've never seen this in a host file previous to FBSD v.6.
apollo# cat /etc/hosts
#::1
PROTECTED] wrote:
At 03:48 PM 4/10/2007, L33T Networks wrote:
What is the second line with 10.20.30.199, and the hostname ends in a
period? I've never seen this in a host file previous to FBSD v.6.
apollo# cat /etc/hosts
#::1localhost.mydomain.com localhost
127.0.0.1
Hello,
I am new to FreeBSD and am wondering if someone couldt tell me how to
properly set /etc/hosts. Right now it is:
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.my.domain
It says to replace my.domain with the domain name of my machine. If
I am using this box remotely and its hostname is web1.server.net
Ro BGCT wrote:
Hello,
I am new to FreeBSD and am wondering if someone couldt tell me how to
properly set /etc/hosts. Right now it is:
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.my.domain
It says to replace my.domain with the domain name of my machine. If
I am using this box remotely and its
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 09:24:59AM -0400, Ro BGCT wrote:
I am new to FreeBSD and am wondering if someone couldt tell me how to
properly set /etc/hosts. Right now it is:
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.my.domain
It says to replace my.domain with the domain name of my machine. If
I am
I have a stock 6.0-RELEASE box that doesn't seem to be
reading /etc/hosts
In /etc/hosts I have:
192.168.1.101 example example.example.org
/etc/nsswitch.conf is stock:
group: compat
group_compat: nis
hosts: files dns
networks: files
passwd: compat
passwd_compat: nis
shells: files
$ host
Josh Paetzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a stock 6.0-RELEASE box that doesn't seem to be
reading /etc/hosts
In /etc/hosts I have:
192.168.1.101 example example.example.org
/etc/nsswitch.conf is stock:
group: compat
group_compat: nis
hosts: files dns
networks: files
passwd
shells: files
$ host example
Host example not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
host command always use DNS. try ping, telnet, whatever use IP
connections
$ host example.example.org
Host example not found 3(NXDOMAIN)
What am I doing wrong here that is keeping /etc/hosts from being read?
--
Thanks
wrong here that is keeping /etc/hosts from being
read?
Ok...That solved my hostname resolution issues. Now the next issue is
why it takes ssh 60 seconds to give me a password prompt. I thought
that was always caused by not having name resolution working. Any
thoughts on this issue?
--
Thanks
Josh Paetzel writes:
Ok...That solved my hostname resolution issues. Now the next
issue is why it takes ssh 60 seconds to give me a password
prompt. I thought that was always caused by not having name
resolution working. Any thoughts on this issue?
You may have solved one
reverse look-ups work.
% man nsswitch.conf
Make sure /etc/nsswitch.conf lists hosts: files dns in that order to
search the /etc/hosts file before DNS.
--
David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Whom computers would destroy
Dear all,
my testbed lacks of Ethernet Ports so one machine has no connection to my DNS,
no problem, there is something called /etc/hosts I thought.
It works if I ping 'hostname', but how can I find out the IP of 'hostname'
from the command line? dig and host want to contact the DNS server
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 07:17:31 +0200, Emanuel Strobl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear all,
my testbed lacks of Ethernet Ports so one machine has no connection to my DNS,
no problem, there is something called /etc/hosts I thought.
It works if I ping 'hostname', but how can I find out the IP
Am Montag, 28. März 2005 08:23 schrieb Alexander Chamandy:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 07:17:31 +0200, Emanuel Strobl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear all,
my testbed lacks of Ethernet Ports so one machine has no connection to my
DNS, no problem, there is something called /etc/hosts I thought
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2005-03-28, Emanuel Strobl scribbled these
curious markings:
Is there one? Unfortunately I can't write one myself, at least not
in a reasonable amount of time
- --cut--
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
use Socket;
my $host = shift or die
it was said:
It works if I ping 'hostname', but how can I find out the IP of
'hostname' from the command line?
Hello,
Would not grep 'hostname' /etc/hosts do this?
HTH,
stheg
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources
Hi,
I am at the moment unsure about the localhost entries in my /etc/hosts. From
/usr/src/etc/hosts I have found this one:
# Host Database
#
# This file should contain the addresses and aliases for local hosts that
# share this file. Replace 'my.domain' below with the domainname of your
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.my.domain
So my hostname is I.and.I so the /etc/hosts entry must be:
::1 localhost localhost.and.I
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.and.I
Now regarding some programs (e.g. mutt) this option is not able to deliver
mail locally
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Nikolas Britton wrote:
Oliver Fuchs wrote:
Hi,
I am at the moment unsure about the localhost entries in my /etc/hosts.
From /usr/src/etc/hosts I have found this one:
# Host Database
#
# This file should contain the addresses and aliases for local hosts
So, I just debugged a majorly annoying problem doing port forwarding with
SSH. Thanks to some creative Googling, I realized I had a weird entry in
my hosts file. What does this ::1 entry mean?
#::1localhost localhost.my.domain
-Clint
Clint Olsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, I just debugged a majorly annoying problem doing port forwarding with
SSH. Thanks to some creative Googling, I realized I had a weird entry in
my hosts file. What does this ::1 entry mean?
#::1 localhost localhost.my.domain
That's
So, I just debugged a majorly annoying problem doing port forwarding with
SSH. Thanks to some creative Googling, I realized I had a weird entry in
my hosts file. What does this ::1 entry mean?
#::1 localhost localhost.my.domain
It's an entry for IPv6, and it is commented
Its for ip6.
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004, Clint Olsen wrote:
So, I just debugged a majorly annoying problem doing port forwarding with
SSH. Thanks to some creative Googling, I realized I had a weird entry in
my hosts file. What does this ::1 entry mean?
#::1localhost
On Jul 26, Bill Moran wrote:
That's an IPv6 entry.
You may want to recompile your kernel without IPv6 support while you're at
it. If you don't understand IPv6, removing support from the kernel can
head off problems before they happen.
Ahh, yes. That's for the tip!
-Clint
--
Clint Olsen
in /etc/hosts properly. So as
you said, `host' is doing it's own thing. The manpage for host gives me
some leads which I'll follow through on.
The latter. For example, many workstations aren't configured to run
named at all; they'll still reference their local hosts file.
Perfect! It's good
At Sun, 4 Jul 2004 it looks like David Fuchs composed:
Excellent, ping does resolve a new entry in /etc/hosts properly. So as
you said, `host' is doing it's own thing. The manpage for host gives me
some leads which I'll follow through on.
Hmm, in the Unix boxes I've seen
I have a quake 1 server installed on my 4.9 release box. it works when I disable UDP
support, but it core dumps when its enabled. I was told to check the /etc/hosts and
make sure there is an entry ther for my machine and its there. any reccomendations
On 2004-07-02 01:45, j0sh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a quake 1 server installed on my 4.9 release box. it works when
I disable UDP support, but it core dumps when its enabled. I was told
to check the /etc/hosts and make sure there is an entry ther for my
machine and its there. any
:33 PM
Subject: Re: Question reguarding /etc/hosts
On 2004-07-02 13:20, j0sh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2004-07-02 01:45, j0sh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a quake 1 server installed on my 4.9 release box. it works when
I
disable UDP support
bump. At the very least perhaps someone could point me to some docs
that give a good explanation?
Original Message
Subject: /etc/hosts and /etc/host.conf confusion
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 11:40:10 -0700
From: David Fuchs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
I'm
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
