Re: host name

• To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
• Subject: Re: host name
• From: Rahul Sundaram <rahulsundaram@xxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 07:27:33 +0530
• Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=eKd9ytMO9BP5oFtLB9TtcXJ0gpKu99RXVp0r8T7YRstnCfjkDWJlJop4dUHxIKZrsQXJEEW5pkWpG8yuWhJS3RB47Y1KeqrFM/QQ/yf+fiDT0joeOGVHtGy00Be3PA75h/GIO4cPvsaFLTdHSNWdLeb2OpmPo1eVmhEg4mTAaDQ=
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0412061246150.14023@jackhammer> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
• Reply-to: Rahul Sundaram <rahulsundaram@xxxxxxxxx>, For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>

Hi

> Rus's is the standard way, and RH used to do it that way. Then it decided to
> be different.

is this "standard" document anywhere. there is a difference between
standard and convention

-- 
Regards,
Rahul Sundaram

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: host name
    • From: John Summerfield

• References:
  • host name
    • From: Fabio De Francesco
  • Re: host name
    • From: Rus Foster
  • Re: host name
    • From: Alexander Dalloz
  • Re: host name
    • From: John Summerfield

• Prev by Date: Re: help with Novell/ximian connector
• Next by Date: Re: Problem whith DNS
• Previous by thread: Re: host name
• Next by thread: Re: host name
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread