Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #260543 > unrolled thread

chrome web browser worthless

Started bygene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net>
First post2023-08-01 11:40 +0200
Last post2023-08-03 04:10 +0200
Articles 20 on this page of 41 — 15 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-01 11:40 +0200
    Re: chrome web browser worthless Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2023-08-01 12:30 +0200
      Re: chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-01 15:00 +0200
        Re: chrome web browser worthless Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> - 2023-08-01 18:40 +0200
    Re: chrome web browser worthless Phil Wyett <philip.wyett@kathenas.org> - 2023-08-01 12:30 +0200
      Re: chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-01 14:20 +0200
        Re: chrome web browser worthless "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2023-08-01 14:40 +0200
    Re: chrome web browser worthless Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-08-01 13:30 +0200
    Re: chrome web browser worthless "Roy J. Tellason, Sr." <roy@rtellason.com> - 2023-08-01 22:20 +0200
    Re: chrome web browser worthless Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2023-08-02 10:00 +0200
      Re: chrome web browser worthless Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-08-02 13:20 +0200
        Re: chrome web browser worthless Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2023-08-02 15:50 +0200
          Re: chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-02 20:10 +0200
            Re: chrome web browser worthless Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2023-08-02 21:10 +0200
              Re: chrome web browser worthless Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2023-08-02 21:50 +0200
        Re: chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-02 19:10 +0200
          Re: chrome web browser worthless Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-08-02 19:30 +0200
            Re: chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-02 20:50 +0200
              Re: chrome web browser worthless David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-08-03 07:20 +0200
          Re: chrome web browser worthless Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2023-08-02 20:30 +0200
            Re: chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-02 21:00 +0200
              Re: chrome web browser worthless Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2023-08-02 21:20 +0200
                Re: chrome web browser worthless Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-08-02 21:20 +0200
                  Re: chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-02 22:20 +0200
                  Re: chrome web browser worthless Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2023-08-02 22:50 +0200
                Re: chrome web browser worthless Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 21:40 +0200
                Re: chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-02 22:10 +0200
                  Re: chrome web browser worthless Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2023-08-02 23:10 +0200
                    Re: chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-03 02:10 +0200
                      Re: chrome web browser worthless <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2023-08-03 06:40 +0200
                    Re: chrome web browser worthless gene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2023-08-03 03:10 +0200
                  127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-08-03 01:30 +0200
                    Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-08-03 01:40 +0200
                      Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless jeremy ardley <jeremy.ardley@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 01:50 +0200
                        Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-08-03 06:30 +0200
                      Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-08-03 04:10 +0200
                    Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-08-03 04:10 +0200
                      Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-08-04 01:00 +0200
                        Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-08-05 04:30 +0200
                          Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-08-05 10:20 +0200
                    Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2023-08-03 04:10 +0200

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#260593

Fromgene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net>
Date2023-08-02 21:00 +0200
Message-ID<GYpeF-4EzF-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260591
On 8/2/23 14:26, Brian wrote:
> On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 13:07:13 -0400, gene heskett wrote:
> 
>> On 8/2/23 07:14, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 08:43:32AM +0100, Darac Marjal wrote:
>>>> * "localhost:80" - This is ambiguous
>>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> It would be nice if we had an exact recipe for how to reproduce the
>>> problem.  Failing that, it'll be up to Gene to debug the situation on
>>> his end.  I'm still leaning toward an edited /etc/hosts file.
>>>
>>
>> At this point Greg, I'll plead guilty to a hand edited /etc/hosts file.
>> So here it is, tell me whats wrong:
>>
>> gene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/hosts
>> 127.0.0.1       localhost
>>
>> There is more of course but the rest of it is private local network
>> (192.168.xxx.yyy) addresses of no concern here.
> 
> No - that isn't the way it works. Give what is asked for, not a censored
> version that suits you.
> 
ok, same cat in full:
gene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/hosts
127.0.0.1       localhost
192.168.71.1    router.coyote.den	router
192.168.71.3    coyote.coyote.den       coyote
192.168.71.4    sixty40.coyote.den      sixty40
192.168.71.7    vna.coyote.den          vna
192.168.71.8    rock64v2.coyote.den     rock64v2
192.168.71.9    bpi51.coyote.den        bpi51
192.168.71.10   go704.coyote.den        go704
192.168.71.11   bpi53.coyote.den        bpi53
192.168.71.12   bpi54.coyote.den        bpi54
192.168.71.13   rpi4.coyote.den         rpi4
192.168.71.21   scanner.coyte.den       scanner
192.168.71.22   rock64.coyote.den       rock64
192.168.71.23   bpi52.coyote.den        bpi52
192.168.71.25   tlm.coyote.den          tlm
192.168.71.50   dddprint.coyote.dn      dddprint
31.184.194.81   Sci-Hub.se

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260595

FromBrian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>
Date2023-08-02 21:20 +0200
Message-ID<GYpy1-4EXO-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260593
On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 14:52:26 -0400, gene heskett wrote:

> On 8/2/23 14:26, Brian wrote:
> > No - that isn't the way it works. Give what is asked for, not a censored
> > version that suits you.
> > 
> ok, same cat in full:
> gene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/hosts
> 127.0.0.1       localhost
> 192.168.71.1    router.coyote.den	router
> 192.168.71.3    coyote.coyote.den       coyote
> 192.168.71.4    sixty40.coyote.den      sixty40
> 192.168.71.7    vna.coyote.den          vna
> 192.168.71.8    rock64v2.coyote.den     rock64v2
> 192.168.71.9    bpi51.coyote.den        bpi51
> 192.168.71.10   go704.coyote.den        go704
> 192.168.71.11   bpi53.coyote.den        bpi53
> 192.168.71.12   bpi54.coyote.den        bpi54
> 192.168.71.13   rpi4.coyote.den         rpi4
> 192.168.71.21   scanner.coyte.den       scanner
> 192.168.71.22   rock64.coyote.den       rock64
> 192.168.71.23   bpi52.coyote.den        bpi52
> 192.168.71.25   tlm.coyote.den          tlm
> 192.168.71.50   dddprint.coyote.dn      dddprint
> 31.184.194.81   Sci-Hub.se

Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.

-- 
Brin.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260596

FromGreg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org>
Date2023-08-02 21:20 +0200
Message-ID<GYpy1-4EXO-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260595
On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 08:14:41PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.

Either deleted, or not provided by Armbian in the first place.  In any
case, it's not immediately relevant to this thread's issue, so long as
the web service doesn't redirect to the system's hostname.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260600

Fromgene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net>
Date2023-08-02 22:20 +0200
Message-ID<GYqu6-4FAK-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260596
On 8/2/23 15:17, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 08:14:41PM +0100, Brian wrote:
>> Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
> 
> Either deleted, or not provided by Armbian in the first place.  In any
> case, it's not immediately relevant to this thread's issue, so long as
> the web service doesn't redirect to the system's hostname.
> 
> .

That might be a possibility, but it comes and goes, sometimes bpi52:80 
works, next week it doesn't. That does not get the google intercept, 
just a 403 when it fails.

I might be able to buy your google excuses if it waited till I pressed 
enter on a filled in address line, but this requester ppps up, disabling 
the keyboard with the first click to get focus on the address line. And 
it pre-fills the address line with a 100+ character google address/path.

You cannot convince me that is not intentional...

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260601

FromBrian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>
Date2023-08-02 22:50 +0200
Message-ID<GYqX7-4FMP-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260596
On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 15:17:20 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 08:14:41PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
> 
> Either deleted, or not provided by Armbian in the first place.  In any
> case, it's not immediately relevant to this thread's issue, so long as
> the web service doesn't redirect to the system's hostname.

Understood. We can now get on with investigating this Debian problem.
I wonder where it lies?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260597

FromLee <ler762@gmail.com>
Date2023-08-02 21:40 +0200
Message-ID<GYpRn-4F5e-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260595
On 8/2/23, Brian wrote:
> On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 14:52:26 -0400, gene heskett wrote:
>
>> On 8/2/23 14:26, Brian wrote:
>> > No - that isn't the way it works. Give what is asked for, not a
>> > censored
>> > version that suits you.
>> >
>> ok, same cat in full:
>> gene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/hosts
>> 127.0.0.1       localhost
  < ... snip ... >

> Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.

$ egrep '^127' /etc/hosts
127.0.0.1       localhost

lee@spot ~
$ uname -a
Linux spot 5.10.0-23-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 5.10.179-2 (2023-07-14)
x86_64 GNU/Linux

Regards,
Lee

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260599

Fromgene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net>
Date2023-08-02 22:10 +0200
Message-ID<GYqkp-4FwM-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260595
On 8/2/23 15:15, Brian wrote:
> On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 14:52:26 -0400, gene heskett wrote:
> 
>> On 8/2/23 14:26, Brian wrote:
>>> No - that isn't the way it works. Give what is asked for, not a censored
>>> version that suits you.
>>>
>> ok, same cat in full:
>> gene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/hosts
>> 127.0.0.1       localhost
>> 192.168.71.1    router.coyote.den	router
>> 192.168.71.3    coyote.coyote.den       coyote
>> 192.168.71.4    sixty40.coyote.den      sixty40
>> 192.168.71.7    vna.coyote.den          vna
>> 192.168.71.8    rock64v2.coyote.den     rock64v2
>> 192.168.71.9    bpi51.coyote.den        bpi51
>> 192.168.71.10   go704.coyote.den        go704
>> 192.168.71.11   bpi53.coyote.den        bpi53
>> 192.168.71.12   bpi54.coyote.den        bpi54
>> 192.168.71.13   rpi4.coyote.den         rpi4
>> 192.168.71.21   scanner.coyte.den       scanner
>> 192.168.71.22   rock64.coyote.den       rock64
>> 192.168.71.23   bpi52.coyote.den        bpi52
>> 192.168.71.25   tlm.coyote.den          tlm
>> 192.168.71.50   dddprint.coyote.dn      dddprint
>> 31.184.194.81   Sci-Hub.se
> 
> Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
> 
True, but I've never seen a description of what that does or what its 
for. So I've removed it from every machine here because its out of scope 
for 127.0.0.1.

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260602

FromBrian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>
Date2023-08-02 23:10 +0200
Message-ID<GYrgt-4G9L-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260599
On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 16:00:24 -0400, gene heskett wrote:

> On 8/2/23 15:15, Brian wrote:
> > On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 14:52:26 -0400, gene heskett wrote:
> > 
> > > On 8/2/23 14:26, Brian wrote:
> > > > No - that isn't the way it works. Give what is asked for, not a censored
> > > > version that suits you.
> > > > 
> > > ok, same cat in full:
> > > gene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/hosts
> > > 127.0.0.1       localhost
> > > 192.168.71.1    router.coyote.den	router
> > > 192.168.71.3    coyote.coyote.den       coyote
> > > 192.168.71.4    sixty40.coyote.den      sixty40
> > > 192.168.71.7    vna.coyote.den          vna
> > > 192.168.71.8    rock64v2.coyote.den     rock64v2
> > > 192.168.71.9    bpi51.coyote.den        bpi51
> > > 192.168.71.10   go704.coyote.den        go704
> > > 192.168.71.11   bpi53.coyote.den        bpi53
> > > 192.168.71.12   bpi54.coyote.den        bpi54
> > > 192.168.71.13   rpi4.coyote.den         rpi4
> > > 192.168.71.21   scanner.coyte.den       scanner
> > > 192.168.71.22   rock64.coyote.den       rock64
> > > 192.168.71.23   bpi52.coyote.den        bpi52
> > > 192.168.71.25   tlm.coyote.den          tlm
> > > 192.168.71.50   dddprint.coyote.dn      dddprint
> > > 31.184.194.81   Sci-Hub.se
> > 
> > Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
> > 
> True, but I've never seen a description of what that does or what its for.

I've seen expert explanations of why it is there.

> So I've removed it from every machine here because its out of scope for
> 127.0.0.1.

An interesting technique when something does not fit with preconceived
notions. Linits Debian's network setup but makes for a happyuser. Unti...

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260613

Fromgene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net>
Date2023-08-03 02:10 +0200
Message-ID<GYu4F-4I2C-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260602
On 8/2/23 17:02, Brian wrote:
> On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 16:00:24 -0400, gene heskett wrote:
> 
>> On 8/2/23 15:15, Brian wrote:
>>> On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 14:52:26 -0400, gene heskett wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/2/23 14:26, Brian wrote:
>>>>> No - that isn't the way it works. Give what is asked for, not a censored
>>>>> version that suits you.
>>>>>
>>>> ok, same cat in full:
>>>> gene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/hosts
>>>> 127.0.0.1       localhost
>>>> 192.168.71.1    router.coyote.den	router
>>>> 192.168.71.3    coyote.coyote.den       coyote
>>>> 192.168.71.4    sixty40.coyote.den      sixty40
>>>> 192.168.71.7    vna.coyote.den          vna
>>>> 192.168.71.8    rock64v2.coyote.den     rock64v2
>>>> 192.168.71.9    bpi51.coyote.den        bpi51
>>>> 192.168.71.10   go704.coyote.den        go704
>>>> 192.168.71.11   bpi53.coyote.den        bpi53
>>>> 192.168.71.12   bpi54.coyote.den        bpi54
>>>> 192.168.71.13   rpi4.coyote.den         rpi4
>>>> 192.168.71.21   scanner.coyte.den       scanner
>>>> 192.168.71.22   rock64.coyote.den       rock64
>>>> 192.168.71.23   bpi52.coyote.den        bpi52
>>>> 192.168.71.25   tlm.coyote.den          tlm
>>>> 192.168.71.50   dddprint.coyote.dn      dddprint
>>>> 31.184.194.81   Sci-Hub.se
>>>
>>> Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
>>>
>> True, but I've never seen a description of what that does or what its for.
> 
> I've seen expert explanations of why it is there.
> 
>> So I've removed it from every machine here because its out of scope for
>> 127.0.0.1.
> 
> An interesting technique when something does not fit with preconceived
> notions. Linits Debian's network setup but makes for a happyuser. Unti...
> 
show mea link to the doc that explains that please
Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260624

From<tomas@tuxteam.de>
Date2023-08-03 06:40 +0200
Message-ID<GYyhX-4LCy-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260613

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 08:05:11PM -0400, gene heskett wrote:

[...]

> show mea link to the doc that explains that please
> Cheers, Gene Heskett.

There's not "the doc", but many of them. For starters, rfc5735 [1]
tells us that the whole subnet 127.0.0.0/8 is available for
loopback purposes (I've used it to test web servers locally,
picking one address and giving them a suitable name in /etc/hosts)

The 127.0.1.1 seems to be a Debianism explained here [2]. It seems
that some (ahem) software (Typical GNOME) wants to know "no, what's
my "real" IP address) and fails if there ain't one, so this seems
to have been done to pacify those.

Bad software, bad.

And now go fire your search engine ;-)

Cheers

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5735#section-4
[2] https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch05.en.html#_the_hostname_resolution

-- 
t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260616

Fromgene heskett <gheskett@shentel.net>
Date2023-08-03 03:10 +0200
Message-ID<GYv0J-4IEr-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260602
On 8/2/23 17:02, Brian wrote:
> On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 16:00:24 -0400, gene heskett wrote:
> 
>> On 8/2/23 15:15, Brian wrote:
>>> On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 14:52:26 -0400, gene heskett wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/2/23 14:26, Brian wrote:
>>>>> No - that isn't the way it works. Give what is asked for, not a censored
>>>>> version that suits you.
>>>>>
>>>> ok, same cat in full:
>>>> gene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/hosts
>>>> 127.0.0.1       localhost
>>>> 192.168.71.1    router.coyote.den	router
>>>> 192.168.71.3    coyote.coyote.den       coyote
>>>> 192.168.71.4    sixty40.coyote.den      sixty40
>>>> 192.168.71.7    vna.coyote.den          vna
>>>> 192.168.71.8    rock64v2.coyote.den     rock64v2
>>>> 192.168.71.9    bpi51.coyote.den        bpi51
>>>> 192.168.71.10   go704.coyote.den        go704
>>>> 192.168.71.11   bpi53.coyote.den        bpi53
>>>> 192.168.71.12   bpi54.coyote.den        bpi54
>>>> 192.168.71.13   rpi4.coyote.den         rpi4
>>>> 192.168.71.21   scanner.coyte.den       scanner
>>>> 192.168.71.22   rock64.coyote.den       rock64
>>>> 192.168.71.23   bpi52.coyote.den        bpi52
>>>> 192.168.71.25   tlm.coyote.den          tlm
>>>> 192.168.71.50   dddprint.coyote.dn      dddprint
>>>> 31.184.194.81   Sci-Hub.se
>>>
>>> Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
>>>
>> True, but I've never seen a description of what that does or what its for.
> 
> I've seen expert explanations of why it is there.
> 
>> So I've removed it from every machine here because its out of scope for
>> 127.0.0.1.
> 
> An interesting technique when something does not fit with preconceived
> notions. Linits Debian's network setup but makes for a happyuser. Unti...
> 
to quote from your own doc on this:
at section 5.1.1:

For a system with a permanent IP address, that permanent IP address 
should be used here instead of 127.0.1.1.

Also the next line but doesn't quite fit:

For a system with a permanent IP address and a fully qualified domain 
name (FQDN) provided by the Domain Name System (DNS), that canonical 
host_name.domain_name should be used instead of just host_name.

but the only dns server is my ISP.  dns queries are pointed at the 
router, which if dnsmasq in the router does not have it cached, asks my 
isp's server. I have no clue what address that may be, all I care about 
is the response time which is typically in the 30 millisecond territory.

Which is precisely what I am doing,  Its a small local network hidden 
behind dd-wrt and ALL machines have a unique permanent address, and a 
hostname in /etc/hostname w/o a local dns service running anyplace.

This thread is finished.

Cheers, Gene Heskett.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260609 — 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless

FromDavid Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>
Date2023-08-03 01:30 +0200
Subject127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless
Message-ID<GYtrX-4Hxx-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260599
On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 16:00:24 (-0400), gene heskett wrote:
> On 8/2/23 15:15, Brian wrote:
> > On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 14:52:26 -0400, gene heskett wrote:
> > > On 8/2/23 14:26, Brian wrote:
> > > > No - that isn't the way it works. Give what is asked for, not a censored
> > > > version that suits you.
> > > > 
> > > ok, same cat in full:
> > > gene@bpi52:~$ cat /etc/hosts
> > > 127.0.0.1       localhost
> > > 192.168.71.1    router.coyote.den	router
> > > 192.168.71.3    coyote.coyote.den       coyote
> > > 192.168.71.4    sixty40.coyote.den      sixty40
> > > 192.168.71.7    vna.coyote.den          vna
> > > 192.168.71.8    rock64v2.coyote.den     rock64v2
> > > 192.168.71.9    bpi51.coyote.den        bpi51
> > > 192.168.71.10   go704.coyote.den        go704
> > > 192.168.71.11   bpi53.coyote.den        bpi53
> > > 192.168.71.12   bpi54.coyote.den        bpi54
> > > 192.168.71.13   rpi4.coyote.den         rpi4
> > > 192.168.71.21   scanner.coyte.den       scanner
> > > 192.168.71.22   rock64.coyote.den       rock64
> > > 192.168.71.23   bpi52.coyote.den        bpi52
> > > 192.168.71.25   tlm.coyote.den          tlm
> > > 192.168.71.50   dddprint.coyote.dn      dddprint
> > > 31.184.194.81   Sci-Hub.se
> > 
> > Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
> > 
> True, but I've never seen a description of what that does or what its
> for.

AIUI it means that your hostname is always resolvable and reachable
regardless of whether the network is yet configured.

I assume the listing above was taken off one of the machines in
the list. I assume you can always ping localhost and 127.0.1.1
(or, for that matter, 127.any.any.any) even if you remove its
network cable (to save downing the interface). However, I would
expect that you can't ping foo (where foo is the hostname) under
the same circumstances (whereas I can).

I have no idea whether it has anything to do with your problem;
I kind of doubt it. I thought you'd solved that anyway, by
typing in the full URL (and then bookmarking it, I hope).

> So I've removed it from every machine here because its out of
> scope for 127.0.0.1.

I'm not sure what you mean by scope. 127.0.0.0 is /8 isn't it?

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260610 — Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless

FromGreg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org>
Date2023-08-03 01:40 +0200
SubjectRe: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless
Message-ID<GYtBE-4HBo-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260609
> On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 16:00:24 (-0400), gene heskett wrote:
> > On 8/2/23 15:15, Brian wrote:
> > > Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
> > > 
> > True, but I've never seen a description of what that does or what its
> > for.

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch05.en.html#_the_hostname_resolution

One click away from the first result of my first Google search on the
topic.  Not hard to find at all.

When you see something that you don't understand and your first reaction
is "let's remove that!" it's no wonder you have so many problems.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260612 — Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless

Fromjeremy ardley <jeremy.ardley@gmail.com>
Date2023-08-03 01:50 +0200
SubjectRe: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless
Message-ID<GYtLk-4HFD-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260610
On 3/8/23 07:34, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>> On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 16:00:24 (-0400), gene heskett wrote:
>>> On 8/2/23 15:15, Brian wrote:
>>>> Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
>>>>
>>> True, but I've never seen a description of what that does or what its
>>> for.
> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch05.en.html#_the_hostname_resolution
>
As an aside, I checked my current debian 12 bookworm installation and 
found in /etc/nsswitch.conf this line

hosts:          files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns myhostname 
mymachines

when I do man nsswitch.conf there is no reference to mdns4_minimal

I see from searching that mdns4_minimal is referenced reasonably often 
over the past few years but I can't find it defined.

The question arises why it's not defined in man nsswitch.conf?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260623 — Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless

FromDavid Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>
Date2023-08-03 06:30 +0200
SubjectRe: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless
Message-ID<GYy8h-4Lzx-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260612
On Thu 03 Aug 2023 at 07:48:54 (+0800), jeremy ardley wrote:
> On 3/8/23 07:34, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > > On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 16:00:24 (-0400), gene heskett wrote:
> > > > On 8/2/23 15:15, Brian wrote:
> > > > > Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
> > > > > 
> > > > True, but I've never seen a description of what that does or what its
> > > > for.
> > https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch05.en.html#_the_hostname_resolution
> > 
> As an aside, I checked my current debian 12 bookworm installation and
> found in /etc/nsswitch.conf this line
> 
> hosts:          files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns myhostname
> mymachines
> 
> when I do man nsswitch.conf there is no reference to mdns4_minimal
> 
> I see from searching that mdns4_minimal is referenced reasonably often
> over the past few years but I can't find it defined.
> 
> The question arises why it's not defined in man nsswitch.conf?

I suspect it's because  man nsswitch.conf  documents the (closed) set
of databases, whereas the various services are documented inside the
library packages that implement them, like libnss-mdns. In this case,
the files to read are /usr/share/doc/libnss-mdns/README.{Debian,md.gz}.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260620 — Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless

FromDavid Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com>
Date2023-08-03 04:10 +0200
SubjectRe: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless
Message-ID<GYvWN-4JgA-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260610
On 8/2/23 16:34, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>> On Wed 02 Aug 2023 at 16:00:24 (-0400), gene heskett wrote:
>>> On 8/2/23 15:15, Brian wrote:
>>>> Where is the line with 127.0.1.1? Debian always provides that.
>>>>
>>> True, but I've never seen a description of what that does or what its
>>> for.
> 
> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch05.en.html#_the_hostname_resolution
> 
> One click away from the first result of my first Google search on the
> topic.  Not hard to find at all.
> 
> When you see something that you don't understand and your first reaction
> is "let's remove that!" it's no wonder you have so many problems.
> 


Thank you -- that answers my question:

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch05.en.html#_the_hostname_resolution

The IP address 127.0.1.1 in the second line of this example may not be 
found on some other Unix-like systems. The Debian Installer creates this 
entry for a system without a permanent IP address as a workaround for 
some software (e.g., GNOME) as documented in the bug #719621.


David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260618 — Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless

FromGreg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org>
Date2023-08-03 04:10 +0200
SubjectRe: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless
Message-ID<GYvWN-4JgA-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260609
On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 07:01:22PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> Interesting.  Is there a Debian specification that explains the 127.0.1.1
> entry?

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch05.en.html#_the_hostname_resolution

I'm sure there are others, but this was the first one I found.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260635 — Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless

FromDavid Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com>
Date2023-08-04 01:00 +0200
SubjectRe: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless
Message-ID<GYPst-4WrF-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260618
On 8/2/23 19:05, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 07:01:22PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
>> Interesting.  Is there a Debian specification that explains the 127.0.1.1
>> entry?
> 
> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch05.en.html#_the_hostname_resolution
> 
> I'm sure there are others, but this was the first one I found.


Thank you.


David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260652 — Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless

FromDavid Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>
Date2023-08-05 04:30 +0200
SubjectRe: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless
Message-ID<GZfdf-5dHm-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260635
On Thu 03 Aug 2023 at 15:56:07 (-0700), David Christensen wrote:
> On 8/2/23 19:05, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 07:01:22PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> > > Interesting.  Is there a Debian specification that explains the 127.0.1.1
> > > entry?
> > 
> > https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch05.en.html#_the_hostname_resolution
> > 
> > I'm sure there are others, but this was the first one I found.
> 
> Thank you.

If you want more detail on motives, then perhaps start reading at:

  https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/07/msg00809.html

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#260657 — Re: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless

FromDavid Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com>
Date2023-08-05 10:20 +0200
SubjectRe: 127.0.1.1 line, was Re: chrome web browser worthless
Message-ID<GZkFX-5hE2-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#260652
On 8/4/23 19:26, David Wright wrote:
> On Thu 03 Aug 2023 at 15:56:07 (-0700), David Christensen wrote:
>> On 8/2/23 19:05, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 07:01:22PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
>>>> Interesting.  Is there a Debian specification that explains the 127.0.1.1
>>>> entry?
>>>
>>> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch05.en.html#_the_hostname_resolution
>>>
>>> I'm sure there are others, but this was the first one I found.
>>
>> Thank you.
> 
> If you want more detail on motives, then perhaps start reading at:
> 
>    https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/07/msg00809.html


Thank you for the link.


David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web