Re: sftp removing writable bit
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 06:29:27PM -0500, Matthew Woehlke wrote: Andrew DeFaria wrote: IOW what's the advantage of an sftp client over just plain scp? Directory listings. Unless I miss something, it's hard to scp a file when you don't already know its path. PLEASE. This thread has lasted long enough that all salient points have been made. We need to move on now. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Thorsten Kampe wrote: Andrew, please, stop it. Why? Because I disagree with you? Do you really don't understand the difference between a simple command line tool like scp and a client that offers extended functionality?! Yes I understand the difference. What I don't understand is the advantage. Sorry that bugs you. -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Do I BELIEVE in the Bible? Hell, I've actually SEEN one! -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Thorsten Kampe wrote: This is no flaming war. It's just nonsense to say everything I can do with foo I can do with bar, too. Actually, no, it's not nonsense at all. In fact it's a very good argument! Of course you can do everything you can do with mutt also with telnet to port 110. It's not /what/ you can do but /how/. Not at all analogous... What, extended functionality, are you referring to, Jason R. DePriest described the difference between a simple command you run and a SFTP/SCP client quite well in [1]. [1] what? Difference? Yes. Advantage? Not necessarily... If you still don't know what he's talking about, I refer you to the man page of yafc[2] or lftp[3] for example. Yes, why bother explaining yourself... besides a graphical user interface? GUI? What are you talking about? Thorsten [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.os.cygwin/92306 Again, this tells you nothing other than sftp gives you a shell. BFD! ssh gives you a frigging shell... [2] http://yafc.sourceforge.net/manual/index.php [3] http://lftp.yar.ru/lftp-man.html Neither of these are particularly compelling... -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Success always occurs in private, and failure in full view. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Gary R. Van Sickle wrote: [snip] Cygwin Content-O-Meter(tm), as of a few dozen posts in this thread ago: +---+ | 0% 100% | | \ | | \ | | \ | | O | +---+ Too bad nobody polices such things. Does your reader of choice lack functionality for skipping a particular thread that you find uninteresting? Who's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read? STFU OK? -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Why do people leave cars worth tens of thousands of dollars in the driveway and leave useless things and junk in boxes in the garage? -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 11:09:41PM -0700, Andrew DeFaria wrote: Gary R. Van Sickle wrote: [snip] Cygwin Content-O-Meter(tm), as of a few dozen posts in this thread ago: +---+ | 0% 100% | | \ | | \ | | \ | | O | +---+ Too bad nobody polices such things. Does your reader of choice lack functionality for skipping a particular thread that you find uninteresting? Who's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read? STFU OK? Gary's evaluation of the situation was correct. This thread has devolved into an uninteresting argument about whether sftp is useful to you or not. What you don't seem to be getting is that no one besides you finds this very interesting. Give it a rest please. The discussion was over several messages ago. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Christopher Faylor wrote: Gary's evaluation of the situation was correct. This thread has devolved into an uninteresting argument about whether sftp is useful to you or not. What you don't seem to be getting is that no one besides you finds this very interesting. Give it a rest please. The discussion was over several messages ago. You suffer from the delusion that even I found it interesting -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Always remember to pillage BEFORE you burn. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Andrew DeFaria wrote: IOW what's the advantage of an sftp client over just plain scp? Directory listings. Unless I miss something, it's hard to scp a file when you don't already know its path. -- Matthew It's impossible! But... do-able. -- Robert MacDougal (Sean Connery, Entrapment) -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
On Sat, 15 Sep 2007, Robert Kiesling wrote: [snip] Cygwin Content-O-Meter(tm), as of a few dozen posts in this thread ago: +---+ | 0% 100% | | \ | | \| | \ | |O | +---+ Neat. Where can I download one of those? At http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2007-09/msg00358.html. Just copy and paste. Of course, it'll always show 0%, but what do you expect from release 0.01? I'm sure that the bug will be fixed in later versions. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!) |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' old name: Igor Pechtchanski '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! Belief can be manipulated. Only knowledge is dangerous. -- Frank Herbert -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 11:10:57PM -0400, Igor Peshansky wrote: On Sat, 15 Sep 2007, Robert Kiesling wrote: [snip] Cygwin Content-O-Meter(tm), as of a few dozen posts in this thread ago: +---+ | 0% 100% | | \ | | \| | \ | |O | +---+ Neat. Where can I download one of those? At http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2007-09/msg00358.html. Just copy and paste. Of course, it'll always show 0%, but what do you expect from release 0.01? I'm sure that the bug will be fixed in later versions. This thread seems to have a life of its own but it seems like the life would be more appropriate in more talkative environs. I'd appreciate it if it would be moved there. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
* Andrew DeFaria (Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:19:00 -0700) DePriest, Jason R. wrote: sftp gives you a familiar FTP shell; it is not just a command you run I understand that. you can list the files on the remote system and make decisions about what files you want instead of requiring that knowledge beforehand Simple. Just ssh remotemachine ls /path. Andrew, please, stop it. Do you really don't understand the difference between a simple command line tool like scp and a client that offers extended functionality?! -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Thorsten Kampe wrote: * Andrew DeFaria (Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:19:00 -0700) DePriest, Jason R. wrote: sftp gives you a familiar FTP shell; it is not just a command you run I understand that. you can list the files on the remote system and make decisions about what files you want instead of requiring that knowledge beforehand Simple. Just ssh remotemachine ls /path. Andrew, please, stop it. Do you really don't understand the difference between a simple command line tool like scp and a client that offers extended functionality?! Isn't that covered by the BWAM contest? - M -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
[ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ] * Andrew DeFaria (Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:19:00 -0700) DePriest, Jason R. wrote: sftp gives you a familiar FTP shell; it is not just a command you run I understand that. you can list the files on the remote system and make decisions about what files you want instead of requiring that knowledge beforehand Simple. Just ssh remotemachine ls /path. Andrew, please, stop it. Do you really don't understand the difference between a simple command line tool like scp and a client that offers extended functionality?! I should know better than to get involved with a budding flame war like this'un. What, extended functionality, are you referring to, besides a graphical user interface? Unfortunately, setting the executable permission on a remote file is considered a security hole. I'd RTFM the ssh(d|-config|whatever) man page to find out if that can be configured. Unfortunately, I don't have the ssh server documentation here at the moment. In terms of megabytes, the majority of my file transfers happen by shell scripts. I tend to use rsync, though not with ssh on the other end. It works great for mirroring. Regards, -- Ctalk Home Page: http://ctalk-lang.sourceforge.net -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
* Robert Kiesling (Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:57:32 -0400 (EDT)) * Andrew DeFaria (Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:19:00 -0700) DePriest, Jason R. wrote: sftp gives you a familiar FTP shell; it is not just a command you run I understand that. you can list the files on the remote system and make decisions about what files you want instead of requiring that knowledge beforehand Simple. Just ssh remotemachine ls /path. Andrew, please, stop it. Do you really don't understand the difference between a simple command line tool like scp and a client that offers extended functionality?! I should know better than to get involved with a budding flame war like this'un. This is no flaming war. It's just nonsense to say everything I can do with foo I can do with bar, too. Of course you can do everything you can do with mutt also with telnet to port 110. It's not /what/ you can do but /how/. What, extended functionality, are you referring to, Jason R. DePriest described the difference between a simple command you run and a SFTP/SCP client quite well in [1]. If you still don't know what he's talking about, I refer you to the man page of yafc[2] or lftp[3] for example. besides a graphical user interface? GUI? What are you talking about? Thorsten [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.os.cygwin/92306 [2] http://yafc.sourceforge.net/manual/index.php [3] http://lftp.yar.ru/lftp-man.html -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
RE: sftp removing writable bit
[snip] Cygwin Content-O-Meter(tm), as of a few dozen posts in this thread ago: +---+ | 0% 100% | | \ | | \| | \ | |O | +---+ Too bad nobody polices such things. -- Gary R. Van Sickle -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
[snip] Cygwin Content-O-Meter(tm), as of a few dozen posts in this thread ago: +---+ | 0% 100% | | \ | | \| | \ | |O | +---+ Neat. Where can I download one of those? -- Ctalk Home Page: http://ctalk-lang.sourceforge.net -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Thorsten Kampe wrote: * Andrew DeFaria (Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:53:25 -0700) Much less than the possibility of scp being present. And I'm not necessarily against the idea of well go out and get a working copy of these programs but often clients do not give consultants that privilege. If your tools are limited or you do transfer just one file then scp is fine. One file? scp can transfer whole trees... But if you want some comfort you should go for the other ones. My point is the chances are better that scp will just work while sftp probably won't be configured... By the way: this has nothing to do with scp versus sftp. And I'm not really sure what you mean by scp - do you mean the protocol or the command line tool? Command line tool. IOW why go through the bother to set up an sftp server (I assume that needs to be set up) and picking and getting an sftp client when in all likelihood scp is already there and ready to use. IOW what's the advantage of an sftp client over just plain scp? Anyway: if I haven't convinced you yet that sftp can have its uses and advantages then I probably never will. That's funny I was thinking the same thing! Doesn't mean we can't discuss it though... -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Everybody repeat after me ...We are all individuals. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
On 9/14/07, Andrew DeFaria wrote: Thorsten Kampe wrote: * Andrew DeFaria (Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:53:25 -0700) Much less than the possibility of scp being present. And I'm not necessarily against the idea of well go out and get a working copy of these programs but often clients do not give consultants that privilege. If your tools are limited or you do transfer just one file then scp is fine. One file? scp can transfer whole trees... But if you want some comfort you should go for the other ones. My point is the chances are better that scp will just work while sftp probably won't be configured... By the way: this has nothing to do with scp versus sftp. And I'm not really sure what you mean by scp - do you mean the protocol or the command line tool? Command line tool. IOW why go through the bother to set up an sftp server (I assume that needs to be set up) and picking and getting an sftp client when in all likelihood scp is already there and ready to use. IOW what's the advantage of an sftp client over just plain scp? Anyway: if I haven't convinced you yet that sftp can have its uses and advantages then I probably never will. That's funny I was thinking the same thing! Doesn't mean we can't discuss it though... -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Everybody repeat after me ...We are all individuals. sftp provides you with an FTP command set where scp does not that's about the only thing I can think of that makes a difference; seems like a compelling reason if you are going to be doing complex transfers, but if you are more familiar and comfortable with scp, then use it -Jason -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
On 9/14/07, Andrew DeFaria wrote: Thorsten Kampe wrote: - - - - - cut - - - - - Command line tool. IOW why go through the bother to set up an sftp server (I assume that needs to be set up) and picking and getting an - - - - - cut - - - - - vi /etc/sshd_config uncomment line: Subsystem sftp /usr/sbin/sftp-server :wq sftp is now set up -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
DePriest, Jason R. wrote: sftp provides you with an FTP command set where scp does not that's about the only thing I can think of that makes a difference; seems like a compelling reason if you are going to be doing complex transfers, but if you are more familiar and comfortable with scp, then use it Hey I'm just trying to learn... What complex transfers are possible in the ftp command set that are not possible with scp/ssh? Hey, I agree, use whatever you are more comfortable with I guess. I just think it makes a lot more sense to just use the basic command set, perhaps extended with the s commands for remote files, rather than set up sftp and use a different command set. IOW I've never seen the need to set up sftp and use it over just using the s commands... -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Did anyone see my lost carrier? -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
On 9/14/07, Andrew DeFaria wrote: DePriest, Jason R. wrote: sftp provides you with an FTP command set where scp does not that's about the only thing I can think of that makes a difference; seems like a compelling reason if you are going to be doing complex transfers, but if you are more familiar and comfortable with scp, then use it Hey I'm just trying to learn... What complex transfers are possible in the ftp command set that are not possible with scp/ssh? Hey, I agree, use whatever you are more comfortable with I guess. I just think it makes a lot more sense to just use the basic command set, perhaps extended with the s commands for remote files, rather than set up sftp and use a different command set. IOW I've never seen the need to set up sftp and use it over just using the s commands... -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Did anyone see my lost carrier? sftp gives you a familiar FTP shell; it is not just a command you run you can list the files on the remote system and make decisions about what files you want instead of requiring that knowledge beforehand compare sftp ? Available commands: cd path Change remote directory to 'path' lcd path Change local directory to 'path' chgrp grp pathChange group of file 'path' to 'grp' chmod mode path Change permissions of file 'path' to 'mode' chown own pathChange owner of file 'path' to 'own' help Display this help text get remote-path [local-path] Download file lls [ls-options [path]] Display local directory listing ln oldpath newpathSymlink remote file lmkdir path Create local directory lpwd Print local working directory ls [path] Display remote directory listing lumask umask Set local umask to 'umask' mkdir pathCreate remote directory progress Toggle display of progress meter put local-path [remote-path] Upload file pwd Display remote working directory exit Quit sftp quit Quit sftp rename oldpath newpathRename remote file rmdir pathRemove remote directory rm path Delete remote file symlink oldpath newpath Symlink remote file version Show SFTP version !command Execute 'command' in local shell ! Escape to local shell ? Synonym for help with $ scp usage: scp [-1246BCpqrv] [-c cipher] [-F ssh_config] [-i identity_file] [-l limit] [-o ssh_option] [-P port] [-S program] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:]file1 [...] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:]file2 use what works; use what you know i prefer sftp because I am more familiar with ftp than i am with rcp (which scp is based on) -Jason -Jason -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
DePriest, Jason R. wrote: sftp gives you a familiar FTP shell; it is not just a command you run I understand that. you can list the files on the remote system and make decisions about what files you want instead of requiring that knowledge beforehand Simple. Just ssh remotemachine ls /path. compare sftp ? Available commands: cd path Change remote directory to 'path' lcd path Change local directory to 'path' chgrp grp path Change group of file 'path' to 'grp' chmod mode path Change permissions of file 'path' to 'mode' chown own path Change owner of file 'path' to 'own' help Display this help text get remote-path [local-path] Download file lls [ls-options [path]] Display local directory listing ln oldpath newpath Symlink remote file lmkdir path Create local directory lpwd Print local working directory ls [path] Display remote directory listing lumask umask Set local umask to 'umask' mkdir path Create remote directory progress Toggle display of progress meter put local-path [remote-path] Upload file pwd Display remote working directory exit Quit sftp quit Quit sftp rename oldpath newpath Rename remote file rmdir path Remove remote directory rm path Delete remote file symlink oldpath newpath Symlink remote file version Show SFTP version !command Execute 'command' in local shell ! Escape to local shell ? Synonym for help with $ scp usage: scp [-1246BCpqrv] [-c cipher] [-F ssh_config] [-i identity_file] [-l limit] [-o ssh_option] [-P port] [-S program] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:]file1 [...] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:]file2 use what works; use what you know i prefer sftp because I am more familiar with ftp than i am with rcp (which scp is based on) Yes. Simply do: $ ssh remote ls /home/andrew/path/to/file file1 $ scp -r dir2 remote:/home/andrew/path/to/file -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com When someone asks you, A penny for your thoughts? and you put your two cents in, what happens to the other penny? -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
* Andrew DeFaria (Wed, 12 Sep 2007 22:49:49 -0700) Thorsten Kampe wrote: * Andrew DeFaria (Wed, 12 Sep 2007 08:48:58 -0700) John J. Culkin wrote: I am seeing an issue with Cygwin's sftp. It seems that after I upload a file that overwrites an existing file, the writable bit is removed. This prevents me from uploading a new version of the file. The files are owned by the SFTP user. Any Ideas? No ideas but a question. What is sftp good for? I mean what does it have over say... scp? You can use your favourite FTP client, right?! As opposed to just typing scp? I still don't get it... Yes. Some clients (by coincidence my favourite ones) like yafc, lftp and SpeedCommander do sftp. Lftp even does fish (which I think is pure scp/ssh). Thorsten -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Thorsten Kampe wrote: * Andrew DeFaria (Wed, 12 Sep 2007 22:49:49 -0700) Thorsten Kampe wrote: * Andrew DeFaria (Wed, 12 Sep 2007 08:48:58 -0700) John J. Culkin wrote: I am seeing an issue with Cygwin's sftp. It seems that after I upload a file that overwrites an existing file, the writable bit is removed. This prevents me from uploading a new version of the file. The files are owned by the SFTP user. Any Ideas? No ideas but a question. What is sftp good for? I mean what does it have over say... scp? You can use your favourite FTP client, right?! As opposed to just typing scp? I still don't get it... Yes. Some clients (by coincidence my favourite ones) like yafc, lftp and SpeedCommander do sftp. Lftp even does fish (which I think is pure scp/ssh). I guess I'm saying is that if yafc, lftp and SpeedCommander can do sftp then scp will also work (no?). Conceptually I would think copy this file and relate that to a cp of sorts before an ftp of sorts. I use ncftp, when ftp is the only way, which doesn't do sftp (I think). Although ncftp can use ftp to copy a file or set of files in one command many ftp clients can't (perhaps yafc, lftp and SpeedCommander can do this - I don't know). What are the chances that those other sftp type clients are available on say the Solaris or Linux clients/servers of a client I'm working for? Much less than the possibility of scp being present. And I'm not necessarily against the idea of well go out and get a working copy of these programs but often clients do not give consultants that privilege. To each his own - we all have our own reasons for our picks of favorites (even if sometimes the reasons are not very well thought out). -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Future historians will be able to study at the Gerald Ford Library; the Jimmy Carter Library; the Ronald Reagan Library and the Bill Clinton Adult Bookstore. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
RE: sftp removing writable bit
On 12 September 2007 15:44, John J. Culkin wrote: Hello I am seeing an issue with Cygwin's sftp. It seems that after I upload a file that overwrites an existing file, the writable bit is removed. This prevents me from uploading a new version of the file. The files are owned by the SFTP user. Any Ideas? puts fingers to temples, strikes a stage mind-reader pose Is it because you made a wrapper script on the server that sets the umask to 002 before starting the sftp server, by any chance? cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
RE: sftp removing writable bit
On 13 September 2007 16:53, Andrew DeFaria wrote: I guess I'm saying is that if yafc, lftp and SpeedCommander can do sftp then scp will also work (no?). No. snip self-serving justification for not answering OP's question in any shape or form based on this non-sequitur cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
* Andrew DeFaria (Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:53:25 -0700) Thorsten Kampe wrote: * Andrew DeFaria (Wed, 12 Sep 2007 22:49:49 -0700) Thorsten Kampe wrote: * Andrew DeFaria (Wed, 12 Sep 2007 08:48:58 -0700) What is sftp good for? I mean what does it have over say... scp? You can use your favourite FTP client, right?! As opposed to just typing scp? I still don't get it... Yes. Some clients (by coincidence my favourite ones) like yafc, lftp and SpeedCommander do sftp. Lftp even does fish (which I think is pure scp/ssh). I guess I'm saying is that if yafc, lftp and SpeedCommander can do sftp then scp will also work (no?). Yes. scp works always because it doesn't have to be enabled. I use ncftp, when ftp is the only way, which doesn't do sftp (I think). Yes. What are the chances that those other sftp type clients are available on say the Solaris or Linux clients/servers of a client I'm working for? Probably not on a server. Much less than the possibility of scp being present. And I'm not necessarily against the idea of well go out and get a working copy of these programs but often clients do not give consultants that privilege. If your tools are limited or you do transfer just one file then scp is fine. But if you want some comfort you should go for the other ones. By the way: this has nothing to do with scp versus sftp. And I'm not really sure what you mean by scp - do you mean the protocol or the command line tool? Anyway: if I haven't convinced you yet that sftp can have its uses and advantages then I probably never will. Thorsten -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
sftp removing writable bit
Hello I am seeing an issue with Cygwin's sftp. It seems that after I upload a file that overwrites an existing file, the writable bit is removed. This prevents me from uploading a new version of the file. The files are owned by the SFTP user. Any Ideas? Thanks, -- John C. -- John J. Culkin Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] The University of Scranton Phone: (570) 941-7665 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
John J. Culkin wrote: Hello I am seeing an issue with Cygwin's sftp. It seems that after I upload a file that overwrites an existing file, the writable bit is removed. This prevents me from uploading a new version of the file. The files are owned by the SFTP user. Any Ideas? No ideas but a question. What is sftp good for? I mean what does it have over say... scp? -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Stop repeat offenders. Don't re-elect them! -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Ever notice how fast Windows runs? Neither did I. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
* Andrew DeFaria (Wed, 12 Sep 2007 08:48:58 -0700) John J. Culkin wrote: I am seeing an issue with Cygwin's sftp. It seems that after I upload a file that overwrites an existing file, the writable bit is removed. This prevents me from uploading a new version of the file. The files are owned by the SFTP user. Any Ideas? No ideas but a question. What is sftp good for? I mean what does it have over say... scp? You can use your favourite FTP client, right?! -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Thorsten Kampe wrote: No ideas but a question. What is sftp good for? I mean what does it have over say... scp? You can use your favourite FTP client, right?! No, that's ftps. sftp is a protocol on top of a ssh session like scp. Brian -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
* Brian Dessent (Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:38:51 -0700) Thorsten Kampe wrote: No ideas but a question. What is sftp good for? I mean what does it have over say... scp? You can use your favourite FTP client, right?! No, that's ftps. sftp is a protocol on top of a ssh session like scp. Aah, you mean I'm only dreaming when I connect to my ssh server with my favourite commandline FTP clients like lftp and yafc? Time to stop taking all these heavy hallucinogens... -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Thorsten Kampe wrote: No, that's ftps. sftp is a protocol on top of a ssh session like scp. Aah, you mean I'm only dreaming when I connect to my ssh server with my favourite commandline FTP clients like lftp and yafc? Time to stop taking all these heavy hallucinogens... Sigh. No, it means those particular ftp clients ALSO happen to support sftp. It does not mean any old regular ftp client can be used, which is what you were implying. Brian -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
* Brian Dessent (Wed, 12 Sep 2007 11:50:07 -0700) Thorsten Kampe wrote: No, that's ftps. sftp is a protocol on top of a ssh session like scp. Aah, you mean I'm only dreaming when I connect to my ssh server with my favourite commandline FTP clients like lftp and yafc? Time to stop taking all these heavy hallucinogens... Sigh. No, it means those particular ftp clients ALSO happen to support sftp. It does not mean any old regular ftp client can be used, which is what you were implying. I didn't imply that - by pure magic - any FTP client is also able to speak SFTP. By the way that's also true for FTPS, right?! Let me repeat: the advantage of using SFTP over pure ssh/scp is that a lot (not everyone) of people can use their /favourite/ ftp client (/not/ old regular ftp client). Thorsten -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Thorsten Kampe wrote: I didn't imply that - by pure magic - any FTP client is also able to speak SFTP. By the way that's also true for FTPS, right?! You may not have meant to imply that, but you said you can use your favorite FTP client without any further qualification whatsoever. Someone who read that who is not familiar with the distinction between sftp and ftps would scratch their head trying to figure out why wget, ncftp, or inetutils' ftp can't seem to do anything with a sftp URL. Brian -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Re: sftp removing writable bit
Thorsten Kampe wrote: * Andrew DeFaria (Wed, 12 Sep 2007 08:48:58 -0700) John J. Culkin wrote: I am seeing an issue with Cygwin's sftp. It seems that after I upload a file that overwrites an existing file, the writable bit is removed. This prevents me from uploading a new version of the file. The files are owned by the SFTP user. Any Ideas? No ideas but a question. What is sftp good for? I mean what does it have over say... scp? You can use your favourite FTP client, right?! As opposed to just typing scp? I still don't get it... -- Andrew DeFaria http://defaria.com Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
