This update changes existing behavior, which may have unexpected
consequences when people upgrade. I observed pkg_chk failing to read a
pkgchk_… file because the hostname was changed after a reboot :-(
Anyway I see two issues here:
1. If hostname is set in /etc/rc.conf, I strongly think that this
should be set as the machine's hostname (FQDN or short or anything
else). In this case dhcpcd should not try to (re)set it. That keeps
the system manager in control.
2. If hostname is not set in /etc/rc.conf I see no problem in dhcpcd
trying to define and set a hostname, e.g. by using a value provided by
the dhcp server. For multi-homed machines, this may be ambiguous if
several names may be supplied for several interfaces and/or IPv6 and
v4, but I still prefer using the selected value unchanged in order to
keep the network manager in control.
Whether hostnames ideally should be short names or FQDN's seems to be
an almost religious issue. I happen to be of the kind of person who
has always used FQDN's as hostname except on OS'es that did not allow
it. However, if the value from /etc/rc.conf is used, I'm less
concerned about what dhcpcd does in other cases.
- Erik
Post by Roy Marples* dhcpcd will now assign a short hostname by default
To use a FQDN hostname, set this in dhcpcd.conf(5)
env hostname_fqdn=YES
This is the wrong default, too - hostname should always be FQDN.
This is far from universally agreed upon.
However, ISTM that if dhcpcd is going to set the hostname at all
(which is usually wrong) it should set the hostname the dhcp server
provides and not try to munge it.
Which hostname should dhcpcd set?
You can read the rest of my snipped comment directly above here
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/source-changes-d/2013/07/20/msg005999.html
TLDR: I justify the use of a short hostname with what I think are sound technical reasons.
imo, dhcpcd should not set a hostname at all, at least not by default.
Maybe it should only set it if no other hostname has been set?
Maybe you should at least read the first paragraph of dhcpcd(8) before commenting?
Roy
This update changes existing behavior, which may have unexpected
consequences when people upgrade. I observed pkg_chk failing to read a
pkgchk_… file because the hostname was changed after a reboot :-(
1. If hostname is set in /etc/rc.conf, I strongly think that this should be
set as the machine's hostname (FQDN or short or anything else). In this case
dhcpcd should not try to (re)set it. That keeps the system manager in
control.
2. If hostname is not set in /etc/rc.conf I see no problem in dhcpcd trying
to define and set a hostname, e.g. by using a value provided by the dhcp
server. For multi-homed machines, this may be ambiguous if several names may
be supplied for several interfaces and/or IPv6 and v4, but I still prefer
using the selected value unchanged in order to keep the network manager in
control.
Whether hostnames ideally should be short names or FQDN's seems to be an
almost religious issue. I happen to be of the kind of person who has always
used FQDN's as hostname except on OS'es that did not allow it. However, if
the value from /etc/rc.conf is used, I'm less concerned about what dhcpcd
does in other cases.
- Erik
* dhcpcd will now assign a short hostname by default
To use a FQDN hostname, set this in dhcpcd.conf(5)
env hostname_fqdn=YES
This is the wrong default, too - hostname should always be FQDN.
This is far from universally agreed upon.
However, ISTM that if dhcpcd is going to set the hostname at all
(which is usually wrong) it should set the hostname the dhcp server
provides and not try to munge it.
Which hostname should dhcpcd set?
You can read the rest of my snipped comment directly above here
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/source-changes-d/2013/07/20/msg005999.html
TLDR: I justify the use of a short hostname with what I think are sound
technical reasons.
imo, dhcpcd should not set a hostname at all, at least not by default.
Maybe it should only set it if no other hostname has been set?
Maybe you should at least read the first paragraph of dhcpcd(8) before
commenting?
Roy
--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de