Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 10:19:57 +0100 From: Leslie Jensen <leslie@eskk.nu> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Unbound in FreeBSD 10 Message-ID: <54A7B43D.4030209@eskk.nu> In-Reply-To: <20150103101630.c29c3bb4.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <54A7A35B.8070201@eskk.nu> <20150103094040.0cc0f867.freebsd@edvax.de> <54A7AD7C.5090807@eskk.nu> <20150103101630.c29c3bb4.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Polytropon skrev 2015-01-03 10:16: > On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 09:51:08 +0100, Leslie Jensen wrote: >> I did try to replace dig with drill in the scripts. It did not work. >> I'll try your suggestion with a symlink. > There is a certain grade of compatibility, but it may > not be 100 percent identical regarding options or output. > > > >> Your suggestion of using bind has crossed my mind. After reading up on >> unbound I can understand the reason to the change. > On network systems I maintain, I usually tend to install > bind from ports and use that. The advantage is that > scripts using dig will continue working as long as > there isn't too much hardcoded paths. Additionally, > symlinking /usr/bin/dig@ -> /usr/local/bin/dig is > less of a problem than trying /usr/bin/dig@ -> /usr/bin/drill > (simply because it's a different program). The version > in ports is also current and can be updated if required > by the usual means (pkg or portmaster) and can be > maintained independently from the OS. > > > >> I've been goggling for quite a while to find descriptions on how to use >> Unbound but very little useful information has turned up. > I keep using unbound on workstations and home machines > and laptops, for all purposes where I don't need more > than a simple resolver. For everything else, see bind. :-) > > OK Thank you. I get your point :-) Returning to bind ;-) /Leslie
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54A7B43D.4030209>