To be perfectly blunt, I'm the package maintainer and I would argue that
I have a pretty good view of what users tend to need.
Both scp and sftp protocols are perfectly capable of ensuring that the
remote end has written the file before returning success; they're
lockstep protocols, not
(i) Right. My bad. I wrote mv but meant sftp
(ii) Reasonable minds can differ on this one, but I still think you are
better off in that case using scp or sftp and deleting afterwards. A
mv is essentially: load to memory; write to destination; delete from
origination; release memory. I'd be
With regard to (i), the more usual case where I find myself needing this
is a remote-to-local or local-to-remote move, not a remote-to-remote
move, and I agree that an interface similar to scp would be convenient.
That's why I haven't closed this.
(ii) is a valid point, but I'd like openssh to be
The requested functionality exists.
Either (i) log into the remote machine via ssh and execute a mv command
or (ii) mount the remote director{y|ies} to a local mountpoint using
sshfs and then use mv as normal.
However, before closing this bug, the technique should probably be
documented in the
The cited FAQ only applies to commercial SSH ...
I think this is more likely to get done on top of sftp, to be honest.
** Changed in: openssh (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided = Wishlist
Status: Unconfirmed = Confirmed
--
there is no 'move' equivalent for scp
You can already use 'rsync --remove-source-files'
--
there is no 'move' equivalent for scp
https://launchpad.net/bugs/92167
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
FYI http://kleber.net/ssh/ssh-faq-4.html
--
there is no 'move' equivalent for scp
https://launchpad.net/bugs/92167
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
