GNU bug report logs - #56432
run-dig vs dig -- do we need both?

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: rpluim <at> gmail.com, larsi <at> gnus.org, 56432 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#56432: run-dig vs dig -- do we need both?
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2022 13:52:16 +0300

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 12:47:42 +0200
> Cc: Robert Pluim <rpluim <at> gmail.com>, Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, 56432 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > run-dig seems to be able to guess the host using
> > net-utils-machine-at-point, something 'dig' doesn't.  So if we want to
> > tell people top use the latter, IMO we should teach 'dig' that trick.
> 
> net-utils-machine-at-point does not seem very useful to me (it seems
> to pick up any word whether or not it looks like a domain name?)

Is it really any worse than not showing any possibly useful default at
all?

> but perhaps we could use thing-at-point instead?

If thing-at-point can guess machines better, sure, why not?  But if it
isn't better, why not use net-utils-machine-at-point?

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.