It seems to me like you should also have an entry 127.0.1.1 added from
the installer with your hostname, similar to the one for 192.168.2.180.
AFAIK there is nothing in specs saying that the hostname needs to be set
to an IP the machine has (which has led us to disable NM touching
/etc/hosts at
Indeed, there was a 127.0.1.1 entry back in the day after the initial
installation. My impression is that that is only a placeholder, and I
replaced it with my machine's statically assigned rfc1918 address.
Setting my fqdn and short name on 127.0.1.1 is not a sensible
configuration for a machine
I'm not sure what you mean. Surely things that connect to the host name
don't care what is set in /etc/hosts, and on the contrary, local
connections to local TCP ports would simply deal with lo rather than
another interface.
Regardless, I'm marking this a Invalid because the discussion should
Sorry for taking so long to revisit this.
Fortunately I use etckeeper, so I have the history of my /etc/hosts file
tracked back over the last 15 months, back to what looks like initial
installation of the system. (I don't remember exactly when I installed)
Looking back over it in detail, it
Weird, since the whole idea is to very much avoid messing with
/etc/hosts; however, the first pass when switching between the two
versions may have caused this.
Also note that your hostname shouldn't be against 127.0.0.1, it is set
by the installer to 127.0.1.1.
If you set it back correctly,
In other words, I'd really need to know what the /etc/hosts file was
looking like before the updates.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/729091
Title:
Hmm, but NM has always been putting the machine's hostname as the first
entry in 127.0.0.1 and ::1, so there isn't really any difference from
before.
** Changed in: network-manager (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Incomplete
** Description changed:
Binary package hint: network-manager
-
-
