Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 11:53:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham Todd <gtodd@bellanet.org> To: Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What happened to nslookup? Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1310161133270.77765@ninga.iciti.internal> In-Reply-To: <525E600B.1010505@digsys.bg> References: <0E.82.01315.25778525@cdptpa-oedge03> <20131011221302.GH1611@albert.catwhisker.org> <54.9B.16944.480B8525@cdptpa-oedge02> <20131012022825.GJ1611@albert.catwhisker.org> <525B3F33.4030103@freebsd.org> <CAN6yY1urgs-YEZ-1CirWTCNtGf5g0Qd2pFuhjLST_9oPWZ=Pjg@mail.gmail.com> <525E600B.1010505@digsys.bg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, Daniel Kalchev wrote: > > On 16.10.13 08:42, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> >> nslookup(1) was deprecated about a decade ago because it often provides >> misleading results when used for DNS troubleshooting. It generally >> works fine for simply turning a name to an address or vice-versa. >> >> People should really use host(1) for simple lookups. It provides the >> same information and does it in a manner that will not cause >> misdirection when things are broken. > > Of course, host(1) is not a replacement for nslookup(1). > > nslookup is interactive, while host is not. This makes for a big > difference in many usage scenarios. The version of nslookup on FreeBSD systems I've used had no command line history or editing (even ntpdc has this now), gave results that were not always in line with other tools (ldns, drill, host etc.), and to do a host lookup inside the nslookup shell you had to type ... "host" :-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1310161133270.77765>