On Feb 26 19:22:03, normalper...@yhbt.net wrote: > Chris Bagwell <ch...@cnpbagwell.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Jan Stary <h...@stare.cz> 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 of each? > > > > > > > > > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1713308&group_id=10706&atid=360706 > > > > > > (I am not sure if there are other entries in the tracker > > > related to this.) > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > Using libcurl is probably not going to go far for a while. > > Agreed, that's significantly more work (and may make sox harder to > install/run on some platforms). > > > Was it you that mentioned macport's has a patch to support BSD-like ftp in > > place of wget? Can you post patch to this list by chance? > > > > I see no down side to optionally supporting ftp in SoX; in addition to wget. > > How about supporting all of curl(1), wget, and ftp (in that order)? > I think curl is preferable if available since it supports the most protocols. > "ftp" functionality seems ambiguous between different platforms.
Yes. The linux ftp(1) for example cannot write the remote file to stdout. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb _______________________________________________ SoX-devel mailing list SoX-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sox-devel
