Harald, > > You are not right. It is not the same behavior! >
what is the difference then? > You can find the IP address of a name with less code, correct, but this > uses the libc implementation of the resolver and does not the same kind > of work a DNS client does. So the decision is first, which kind of work > you need -> In your case: Simple IP address lookup with libc function. > are you talking about dnsip? > In case you would need a full fledged DNS query (seperate from libc > implementation), Laurent would be right. I don't think you are able to > write a full DNS query with less code. > so both ping and nslookup have full fledged DNS query? > So please keep in mind: Things tend to look different if viewed from a > more global point, and you need to use the correct language to > describe your problem, otherwise anybody will misunderstand something > and complain or point you in a wrong direction. > I've done that very clear, but still I'll retry: I have two system, on each I need to run a script which queries me for a hostname, that hostname needs to be converted to ip, what applet should I use that will give me the ip without the need for output parsing? > Beside this, Busybox has nslookup. What is wrong with that? Only > different output format? In case you complain because the many > information it displays: What about an option for nslookup, lets say -s > (for short) to display only single line of output (if only one address > returned from query)? Just as an unverified idea. What about this? as said before, I have two distinct systems in which nslookup gives two distinct outputs. that is why nslookup isn't good. I cannot be more clear then that. maybe adding -S switch for nslookup is a good idea but that is not what I've intended to begin with. Eial. _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
