On Sun, 19 Sep 1999, Anders Arnholm wrote:
> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 12:18:53 +0200
> From: Anders Arnholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Robert Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Chris Rutter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: ProFTPd being lame
> Resent-Date: 19 Sep 1999 10:19:02 -0000
> Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ;
>
> >>>Robert Stone wrote:
>
> > Virtualhosting in proftpd is far easier than with wu-ftpd. As it
> > stands now, I don't believe any debian ftp server supports virtual anon ftp
> > sites as provided besides proftpd.
> Roxen does, at least if you have different IP numbers, I can't get IP-less
> vistual hosting to work with ftp sessions. And as a ISP the security issues
> of
> Proftpd shuold be a realy big consern.
Well, FTP isn't designed to work with the HTML 1.1 standard for the client
sending the server which site to go to. Aside from that, Roxen has done a very
good job for both web server and ftp server uses.
<Off topic>
The only feature it lacks is the ability to do automated account setup from
another script. (Which is the ONLY thing that apache does better than Roxen).
Maybe I'll tinker a bit and make a module for auto-creation of new web accounts
from a shell script or something. Until then, for web hosting, Apache is the
better choice.
</Off topic>
Dave Bristel
> > Proftpd also has a config file syntax that less experienced
admins
> > find easier to work with (since they've all mucked with apache configs by
> > the time the're dealing with ftp servers).
>
> Roxen has a nice http interface for configuring.
>
> > This software is not essential, but it's certainly not useless.
>
> The suggestion was to move it to contrib allot of the software in contrib are
> wery usefull.
>
> / Balp
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
