On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric P. Scott) wrote:
> [Jeffrey Goldberg]
> >As an aside, I'd like to rant that there is no reason for ftp to
> >exist anymore. Sure it is stateful in a way that HTTP isn't, but
> >that isn't enough to justify its continued use.
>
[Jeffrey Goldberg]
>As an aside, I'd like to rant that there is no reason for ftp to
>exist anymore. Sure it is stateful in a way that HTTP isn't, but
>that isn't enough to justify its continued use.
I have very good connectivity to several FTP-only mirror sites,
and relatively poor connectiv
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 07:52:51PM -0500, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2007, at 5:50 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>
> >On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 05:29:03PM -0500, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> As far as I can tell this and many other configuration options
> >>are not
> >> documented an
On Mar 21, 2007, at 5:50 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 05:29:03PM -0500, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
As far as I can tell this and many other configuration options
are not
documented anywhere outside of the .mk files themselves. Is that
really how
things should be?
L
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 14:45:39 -0800
"Peter A. Giessel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2007/03/21 14:29, Jeffrey Goldberg seems to have typed:
> >
> > As an aside, I'd like to rant that there is no reason for ftp to
> > exist anymore. Sure it is stateful in a way that HTTP isn't, but
> > that
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 05:29:03PM -0500, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
>
> As far as I can tell this and many other configuration options are not
> documented anywhere outside of the .mk files themselves. Is that
> really how
> things should be?
>
Let me tell you a totally awesome secret: YOU
On 2007/03/21 14:29, Jeffrey Goldberg seems to have typed:
>
> As an aside, I'd like to rant that there is no reason for ftp to
> exist anymore. Sure it is stateful in a way that HTTP isn't, but
> that isn't enough to justify its continued use.
>
>
> Of course having recently display
I asked how to pass the -p argument to fetch when doing a port upgrade.
Answers here, and further digging confirm that the presuppositions
behind my question were wrong.
First of all, the problem that I was having had nothing to do with
active vs passive FTP. I had butchered all FTP traffi
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 23:04:16 -0500
Jeffrey Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On my perimeter firewall, I default deny outbound traffic. This
> cuts off fetching using active FTP. Is there some way that I can
> tell portupgrade to pass the -p flag to fetch?
This doesn't make any sense unless
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 00:27:19 -0400
Chris Slothouber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Jeffrey,
>
> Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
> > On my perimeter firewall, I default deny outbound traffic. This
> > cuts off fetching using active FTP. Is there some way that I can
> > tell portupgrade to pass the -p f
Hi Jeffrey,
Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
On my perimeter firewall, I default deny outbound traffic. This cuts
off fetching using active FTP. Is there some way that I can tell
portupgrade to pass the -p flag to fetch?
I know that I can temporarily change my firewall rules, but I think that
it wo
On my perimeter firewall, I default deny outbound traffic. This cuts
off fetching using active FTP. Is there some way that I can tell
portupgrade to pass the -p flag to fetch?
I know that I can temporarily change my firewall rules, but I think
that it would be a cleaner solution to just t
12 matches
Mail list logo
