Subj : sur.ly To : Ky Moffet From : Barry Martin Date : Sun Jan 26 2025 07:48:00 Hi Ky! > > For those using Ubuntu/Linux > KM> ...and probably any linux. > Probably. KM> Indeedy! KM> https://linuxconfig.org/hosts-file-example-on-linux KM> https://linuxhandbook.com/etc-hosts-file/ I pulled those up, top one first. Added a bit of information to the file I have spinning around on the hard drive. Second one - that site sounds familiar! Is the source for the file spinning around! (I've learned to keep copies on my hard drive as sometimes couldn't a good source again.) KM> ip6, argh. KM> https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/modify-manage-hosts-file-linux/ I haven't done much with IPv6 -- around the house it may seem like I've hit 127 devices but no. Plus how the heck is one supposed to memorize a random-looking alphanumeric soup? > > edit: /etc/hosts > > add the line (anywhere): 127.0.0.1 sur.ly > > save and exit > KM> Ah, I need to check that. I suppose I could just replace the > KM> default with my hoary old Windows HOSTS (which goes back over 20 > KM> years now). > > KM> > > KM> hosts > KM> hosts > KM> hosts > KM> hosts.allow > KM> hosts.deny > KM> hosts.org > KM> ...da fruit?? > When given lemons....? KM> Make a mess in the kitchen! Click the radio button to load your Roomba software, tell it to go to the Kitchen - why is it in the barn?? > My guess is two of the 'hosts' files are from old/antique versions > updated over time and either the file's directory was moved or they're > in backup directories. If using the 8.3 convention "hosts.org" could > mean "hosts - original". KM> Well, those are linux files, but ... allow and deny are dated KM> 2009, which would be about when PCLinuxOS was first forked from KM> Mandrake. I'd guess Tex forgot about them and went to a single KM> HOSTS file instead, which would be the current model. Makes sense. Simplifying to one file makes sense, though sometimes it is nice to have all the no-go's in one and you-may-pass in another. ....With one file not so bad if a short list and can see the header as a reminder of what section one is in but when scrolls off-screen..... > As for "hosts.allow" and "hosts.deny", possibly whitelist and blacklist > files, though not necessarily for the main Windows OS. I'm thinking > more for a networking type utility. KM> Ain't Windows, but yeah, that's what they appear to be. To me some of the config files look like they could be just about any operating system. > KM> One of the three files named hosts has quite an extensive default > KM> list of bad-site no-donut. And they're routed to 0.0.0.0 instead > KM> of 128.0.0.1 -- this works better on some OSs (apparently it's > KM> not even routed in the first place, rather than needing to be > KM> routed to oblivion), not well on others. > > Yes, and 0.0.0.0 still seems to have some usage today. This quote is > from response to me in a MythTV forum for troubleshooting why an > external device wasn't connecting: KM> 0.0.0.0 is the "loopback" address and 127.0.0.1 is "localhost". KM> But there's debate which should be used in the HOSTS file KM> (regardless of OS) and in ages past on Windows, when I tried KM> 0.0.0.0 instead of 127.0.0.1, I got some weird error, so stopped KM> using it. KM> https://superuser.com/questions/1690091/whats-the-difference-for-a KM> -hosts-file-w KM> en-deciding-to-use-127-0-0-1-or-0-0-0-0 KM> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20778771/what-is-the-differenc KM> e-between-0-0 KM> 0-0-127-0-0-1-and-localhost That helped. Basically 127.0.0.1 is "this machine only" and 0.0.0.0 is party on! The parents are away and.... > It should be the bind_address variable. > 0.0.0.0 and the ipv6 equivalent :: means connect through all ip > addresses. Giving a discrete address limits to that address. > (And is 128.0.0.1 a typo?) KM> Indubitably. Typed a random address to no particular purpose. And here I was settling in to learn something new! KM> Tho occurs to me that any nonsense address would work to send the KM> unwanted to oblivion. If it doesn't exist.... > KM> That'll put 'em in a sur.ly mood!! > I don' wanna go home! Waaaaaah! KM> I always get a laugh from the Winhelp header: KM> "There's no place like 127.0.0.1" That'll work! > > Can test by afterwards loading your browser, type 'sur.ly' (no quotes!) > > in the address bar, and see a message it can't find the site. > KM> Press to test.... release to detonate...... > Or why I will sometimes test on a Raspberry Pi or Virtual Machine before > installing on this computer -- The Pi's and VMs are somewhat > 'disposable'. KM> Good thought, unless you're a Pi or a VM! The good news is I haven't bricked either. ...Recently tested three pieces of software as I finally got around to it; I didn't have anything to view some old-old .psd files. Tested on a VM as I didn't want 'residue' left on this machine if the utility didn't work or I didn't like it. The two candidates which seemed most likely to work (by the usage blurb and reviews) didn't. The third one did and got installed onto this machine. KM> Hmm. I wonder if we can run "Life" in a VM.... But if a Virtual Machine doesn't physically exist then would that make "Life" into a "Dream"?? > .. Help! My toilet roll has no documentation! KM> You're scaring me.... So here's a thought: if someone brought a roll of toilet paper to an 'uncivilized' tribe and just handed it over with no explanation -- guess more demostration due to the language difference -- would they figure out what to do with it? ¯ ® ¯ BarryMartin3@MyMetronet.NET ® ¯ ® .... Technically all the money spent on food has been flushed down toilet. --- MultiMail/Win32 v0.47 þ wcECHO 4.2 ÷ ILink: The Safe BBS þ Bettendorf, IA --- QScan/PCB v1.20a / 01-0462 * Origin: ILink: CFBBS | cfbbs.no-ip.com (454:1/1) .