[ On Sunday, February 21, 1999 at 17:11:49 (-0500), Andrew Brown wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: bind/named and nslookup
>
> On Fri, Feb 19, 1999 at 12:24:42PM -0500, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> >
> >I dislike "dig" so much I don't much care where it goes, just as long as
> >it does [go away]!  ;-)
> 
> that's funny...i bet you prefer nslookup, eh?  nslookup is nasty evil
> and blecherous.  and does things that it doesn't mention (like
> following cnames) that dig doesn't do.  no...dig is much nicer.  :P

No, actually I don't really like nslookup either (though I try to keep
enough knowledge about it in the back of my mind so that I can use it if
I have to because it's almost always available on every kind of Unix
system that uses DNS, especially legacy systems).

In most cases though I always use "host" (after I've upgraded to the
most recent release).  It's a real Unix-style tool, unlike both dig and
nslookup, and from what I know it also can do more diagnostic checking
of results and even full zones than any other similar tool.

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <gwoods@acm.org>      <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>