Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2004 12:12:57 -0700 From: David Fuchs <david@davidfuchs.ca> To: Kevin Stevens <freebsd@pursued-with.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Fwd: /etc/hosts and /etc/host.conf confusion] Message-ID: <40E856B9.30601@davidfuchs.ca> In-Reply-To: <B5AD052E-CCAB-11D8-8439-000A959CEE6A@pursued-with.net> References: <40E62A8C.1040908@davidfuchs.ca> <B5AD052E-CCAB-11D8-8439-000A959CEE6A@pursued-with.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kevin Stevens wrote: > > Try ping; even if the host isn't available you can see if it resolves. > "host" does it's own thing, which is sometimes non-obvious (to me at > least). Look at the sections in man host about the variables it expects > to be configured. > 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. > 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 to know this, as the manpage doesn't specifically state that the system checks for a running named process - at least I didn't see that anywhere. Thanks for your help Kevin! -- Thanks, -David Fuchs
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40E856B9.30601>