On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 6:35 AM, Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net> wrote: > On Fri, 10.04.15 13:03, Nick Owens (misch...@offblast.org) wrote: > >> From: mischief <misch...@offblast.org> >> >> The maximum domain name size is larger than the maximum host name size. >> The smaller limit causes valid domains provided by DHCP or .network >> files to be silently ignored. > > Hmm? > > Can you give an example? > > What is a domain name according to your definition? And what a > hostname? > > So far, a hostname in my definition was either a single label, or an > fqdn, and a domain name the part of the fqdn with the first label > removed... > > With such a definition I am not sure I understand the patch, hence > please explain, and give a valid example of where this turns out to be > an issue?
./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/posix1_lim.h:#define _POSIX_HOST_NAME_MAX 255 ./x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/local_lim.h:#define HOST_NAME_MAX 64 ./x86_64-linux-musl/limits.h:#define HOST_NAME_MAX 255 Perhaps we need to use _POSIX_HOST_NAME_MAX ?, or redefine HOST_NAME_MAX to 255? > > Lennart > > -- > Lennart Poettering, Red Hat > _______________________________________________ > systemd-devel mailing list > systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel -- Liberty equality fraternity or death, Shawn Landden ChurchOfGit.com _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
