LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 02-15-2013, 07:38 AM   #1
stf92
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2007
Location: Buenos Aires.
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,265

Rep: Reputation: 49
Can two hosts in the same LAN have the same local hostname?


Hi:

Can two hosts in the same LAN have the same local hostname?
 
Old 02-15-2013, 07:46 AM   #2
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,415

Rep: Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968
yes, unless there's winbind or somethign broadcasting it, it's irrelevant what thte internal machien name is.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-15-2013, 07:46 AM   #3
WiseDraco
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: Europe,Latvia,Riga
Distribution: slackware,slax, exMandriva
Posts: 400

Rep: Reputation: 41
i think, without problem, unless you try run samba server, or using hostname to work with it via network ( like a ping hostname.com and so - it may be involve problems with which host in which conditions really answer on that )
but why you need the same hostname for two machines? :-O
 
Old 02-15-2013, 07:51 AM   #4
stf92
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2007
Location: Buenos Aires.
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,265

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 49
It was before I began with networking that I put them that name. Besides, slackware puts it by default.
 
Old 02-15-2013, 07:53 AM   #5
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,415

Rep: Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968
internal hostnames really have nothing at all to do with networking 99% of the time
 
Old 02-15-2013, 08:12 AM   #6
WiseDraco
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: Europe,Latvia,Riga
Distribution: slackware,slax, exMandriva
Posts: 400

Rep: Reputation: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by stf92 View Post
It was before I began with networking that I put them that name. Besides, slackware puts it by default.
you easy change it any time. get edit files /etc/HOSTNAME and /etc/hosts for change a local machine name.
 
Old 02-15-2013, 08:46 AM   #7
stf92
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2007
Location: Buenos Aires.
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,265

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 49
Thanks guys. By the way, I'm reading The Linux Network Administrator's Guide, 2nd edition from The Linux Documentation Project and wondered if it is up to date. I mentions LInux 2.0!
 
Old 02-15-2013, 08:54 AM   #8
WiseDraco
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: Europe,Latvia,Riga
Distribution: slackware,slax, exMandriva
Posts: 400

Rep: Reputation: 41
many things in linux is unchanged for many, many years
 
Old 02-15-2013, 09:07 AM   #9
stf92
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2007
Location: Buenos Aires.
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,265

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 49
Yes but slackware being so traditional, the book, which is not intended specifically for it, mentions /etc/rc.d/*, which is relatively new (perhaps not so new).
 
Old 02-15-2013, 09:14 AM   #10
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,415

Rep: Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968
the rc.d directory is not new in any way at all. 15 years I've been using Linux (holy crap!) and it's always been there on Redhat
 
Old 02-15-2013, 09:15 AM   #11
WiseDraco
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: Europe,Latvia,Riga
Distribution: slackware,slax, exMandriva
Posts: 400

Rep: Reputation: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by stf92 View Post
Yes but slackware being so traditional, the book, which is not intended specifically for it, mentions /etc/rc.d/*, which is relatively new (perhaps not so new).

rc.d not new. in my first slack, 4.0, if i remeber correctly, always be rc.d .
in distros like a red hat and so on startup scripts look strong different and not that easy as in slack.
also todays many distros is more and more like to microsoft products in philosophy.
for example: in slack you can give user any password without pain. if you give too simple password, i e "abc", slack warn you, but entering the same pass twice, it allow you to use that password, what you want.
in redhat is differently situation - it is like a microsoft product. it has think, it know better than you, what you want - you cannot give simple password in easy way - system ping back to you with "password is too simple, choose another password!".
that is one of key moments between good systems, like a slackware, and bad," build for idiots, who, expectly, do not know any, so be them be cannot be given full control"
 
Old 02-15-2013, 09:18 AM   #12
stf92
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2007
Location: Buenos Aires.
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,265

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 49
Well, I maybe was wrong because there is a whole new class of *.d/ directories now, as in /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/.
 
Old 02-15-2013, 09:24 AM   #13
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,415

Rep: Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968
certainly .d directories as a more generic thing has come of age somewhat. They're a great convention to follow. Makes deploying software so so much easier
 
Old 02-15-2013, 09:26 AM   #14
stf92
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2007
Location: Buenos Aires.
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,265

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiseDraco View Post
rc.d not new. in my first slack, 4.0, if i remeber correctly, always be rc.d .
in distros like a red hat and so on startup scripts look strong different and not that easy as in slack.
also todays many distros is more and more like to microsoft products in philosophy.
for example: in slack you can give user any password without pain. if you give too simple password, i e "abc", slack warn you, but entering the same pass twice, it allow you to use that password, what you want.
in redhat is differently situation - it is like a microsoft product. it has think, it know better than you, what you want - you cannot give simple password in easy way - system ping back to you with "password is too simple, choose another password!".
that is one of key moments between good systems, like a slackware, and bad," build for idiots, who, expectly, do not know any, so be them be cannot be given full control"
Very well said. The microsoft mentality is general. For example the VHS recorder went to the tape end and then, without asking anything, it rewinded and ejected while me, in the middle of the night, was in the deeper slip!

Worst even, why does the dvd burner eject the disk after burning! I now pass by and ... kiss good by to the tray.

Last edited by stf92; 02-15-2013 at 09:36 AM.
 
Old 02-15-2013, 09:28 AM   #15
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,415

Rep: Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968Reputation: 1968
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiseDraco View Post
good systems, like a slackware, and bad," build for idiots
That makes you look *really* daft. There's nothing wrong with some sane defaults in certain places.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hostname to Hostname mapping within /etc/hosts possible? helptonewbie Linux - Newbie 2 09-09-2010 07:43 AM
hostname and /etc/hosts. stf92 Linux - Newbie 9 07-03-2010 01:25 PM
referencing hosts by (special) hostname for IPv6 link local address Skaperen Linux - Networking 1 05-03-2010 11:21 AM
Changing Hostname.../etc/hosts...? vous Linux - Networking 13 01-16-2008 09:38 PM
External Hosts Resolve but Local Hosts Do Not kjm9 Linux - Networking 7 11-19-2005 04:51 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:09 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration