On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 05:25:15PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2015/06/01 10:20, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 6/1/15, Sunil Nimmagadda su...@nimmagadda.net wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:16:09PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
screw ftp. just make a new util
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:16:09PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
Sunil Nimmagadda wrote:
Hi,
The idea is to start with the subset of ftp(1) functionality needed
by pkg_add(1):
ftp [-o output] url ...
i.e., should be able to download files over HTTP(S) and FTP.
This
Hi,
quick comments inline.
On 6/1/15, Sunil Nimmagadda su...@nimmagadda.net wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:16:09PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
Sunil Nimmagadda wrote:
Hi,
The idea is to start with the subset of ftp(1) functionality needed
by pkg_add(1):
ftp [-o output] url ...
On 2015/06/01 10:20, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 6/1/15, Sunil Nimmagadda su...@nimmagadda.net wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:16:09PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
screw ftp. just make a new util http, that just does http.
Sorry, it's not good enough to replace ftp(1) for system use without
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 08:06:38PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2015/06/01 10:20, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 6/1/15, Sunil Nimmagadda su...@nimmagadda.net wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:16:09PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
screw ftp. just make a new util http, that just does http.
Sorry, it's not good enough to replace ftp(1) for system use without
ftp. Like it or not, ports fetches need FTP and can't really rely on
installing something for ports to do that.
Yes, but splitting these protocols is good, right? IMHO, having a clean
and simple http(1) and a (more)
Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2015/06/01 10:20, patrick keshishian wrote:
On 6/1/15, Sunil Nimmagadda su...@nimmagadda.net wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:16:09PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
screw ftp. just make a new util http, that just does http.
Sorry, it's not good enough to replace
Ted Unangst said:
Stuart Henderson wrote:
Sorry, it's not good enough to replace ftp(1) for system use without
ftp. Like it or not, ports fetches need FTP and can't really rely on
installing something for ports to do that.
It's not obvious to me why this would be the case. The ports tree
On 2015/06/02 00:09, Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote:
Ted Unangst said:
Stuart Henderson wrote:
Sorry, it's not good enough to replace ftp(1) for system use without
ftp. Like it or not, ports fetches need FTP and can't really rely on
installing something for ports to do that.
It's not
One important thing is missing from this discussion: what exactly is
wrong with ftp(1)?
The code isto put it nicelyrather dated ;-)
First off, let's show the result of a grep.
cmds.c: (void)setjmp(jabort);
cmds.c: (void)setjmp(jabort);
cmds.c: (void)setjmp(jabort);
cmds.c: if
On 06/01/15 18:29, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2015/06/02 00:09, Dmitrij D. Czarkoff wrote:
Ted Unangst said:
Stuart Henderson wrote:
Sorry, it's not good enough to replace ftp(1) for system use without
ftp. Like it or not, ports fetches need FTP and can't really rely on
installing something
Sunil Nimmagadda wrote:
Hi,
The idea is to start with the subset of ftp(1) functionality needed
by pkg_add(1):
ftp [-o output] url ...
i.e., should be able to download files over HTTP(S) and FTP.
This implementation works as FETCH_CMD for pkg_add(1) over HTTP(S).
FTP is not yet
12 matches
Mail list logo
