Jan Stary wrote:
> On Feb 26 10:14:58, ch...@cnpbagwell.com wrote:
> > I see no down side to optionally supporting ftp in SoX; in addition to wget.
>
> Would ./configure be the proper place to make the decision?
Yes, I think so. Not sure of the best way to check for behavior/stdout
support, tho
On Feb 26 19:22:03, normalper...@yhbt.net wrote:
> Chris Bagwell wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Jan Stary wrote:
> > > Currently. sox uses wget(1) to access remote files and streams.
> > > What is the developers' opinion about what do do with it
> > > (if anything)?
> > >
> > > The o
On Feb 26 10:14:58, ch...@cnpbagwell.com wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Jan Stary wrote:
>
> > Currently. sox uses wget(1) to access remote files and streams.
> > What is the developers' opinion about what do do with it
> > (if anything)?
> >
> > The obvious candidates are wget(1), ftp
Chris Bagwell wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Jan Stary wrote:
> > Currently. sox uses wget(1) to access remote files and streams.
> > What is the developers' opinion about what do do with it
> > (if anything)?
> >
> > The obvious candidates are wget(1), ftp(1), curl(1) and libcurl(3).
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Jan Stary wrote:
> Currently. sox uses wget(1) to access remote files and streams.
> What is the developers' opinion about what do do with it
> (if anything)?
>
> The obvious candidates are wget(1), ftp(1), curl(1) and libcurl(3).
> What would be the pros and cons
Currently. sox uses wget(1) to access remote files and streams.
What is the developers' opinion about what do do with it
(if anything)?
The obvious candidates are wget(1), ftp(1), curl(1) and libcurl(3).
What would be the pros and cons of each?
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1713
