ftp by Sunil Nimmagadda

[Jay Patel]

OpenBSD has recently added new ftp
:https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=155769388802752&w=2

Source here :

https://github.com/snimmagadda/http?files=1

Might be useful to NetBSD ftp

Regards,

[Jason Thorpe]

Post by Jay Patel
OpenBSD has recently added new ftp
:https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=155769388802752&w=2

What are the advantages of this version of ftp over the one NetBSD currently has?

Post by Jay Patel
https://github.com/snimmagadda/http?files=1

404

-- thorpej


--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

[Jason Thorpe]

Seems like it adds stuff that we’ve had for years, too, at least at a glance.

-- thorpej
Sent from my iPhone.

Post by Jason Thorpe

Post by Jay Patel
OpenBSD has recently added new ftp
:https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=155769388802752&w=2

What are the advantages of this version of ftp over the one NetBSD currently has?

We are in 2019, and some people are still wasting their time rewriting FTP
clients.

--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

[Maxime Villard]

Post by Jason Thorpe

Post by Jay Patel
OpenBSD has recently added new ftp
:https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=155769388802752&w=2

What are the advantages of this version of ftp over the one NetBSD currently has?

We are in 2019, and some people are still wasting their time rewriting FTP
clients.

--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

[Jason Thorpe]

Post by Jay Patel
OpenBSD has recently added new ftp
:https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=155769388802752&w=2
https://github.com/snimmagadda/http?files=1
Might be useful to NetBSD ftp

Looks like they've backed it out.

Post by Jay Patel
Regards,
--
Jay Patel
https://www.unitedbsd.com/

-- thorpej


--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

[Mouse]

We are in 2019, and some people are still wasting their time
rewriting FTP clients.

Who are you - or I, or anyone else besides the author - to say that
such time is wasted?

/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML ***@rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B

--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

[Robert Elz]

Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 21:40:39 +0200
From: Maxime Villard <***@m00nbsd.net>
Message-ID: <62e8204b-bee5-24f4-c99d-***@m00nbsd.net>

| We are in 2019, and some people are still wasting their time rewriting FTP
| clients.

FTP is still a much better protocol (actually designed by people who
knew what they were doing) over the alternative (HTTP) which was just
thrown together without almost any real understanding of some of the
implications (which later versions have been trying to fix).

True, FTP has 3 way transfers - which all servers support, but very few
clients were ever written to utilise, which isn't all that much use
these days, and there are differences based upon the expected usage
model (HTTP servers tell the client what kind of file is being fetched,
FTP client users are expected to know what it is that they are fetching.
I leave it to you (all) to decide which is safer...)

Beyond that, almost all clients (including ours) speak both protocols,
their new ftp client program would (I assume, and if it still existed)
talk both FTP and HTTP, and most probably the secure versions of each
as well.

kre


--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

[Fernando Gont]

Post by Robert Elz
Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 21:40:39 +0200
| We are in 2019, and some people are still wasting their time rewriting FTP
| clients.
FTP is still a much better protocol (actually designed by people who
knew what they were doing) over the alternative (HTTP) which was just
thrown together without almost any real understanding of some of the
implications (which later versions have been trying to fix).

That looks like a claim that would be quite hard to back. As a
datapoint, using layer-3 and layer-4 objects on an layer-7 protocol
doesn't seem that the right thing to do...

Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: ***@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492





--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

[Kamil Rytarowski]

Post by Jay Patel
OpenBSD has recently added new ftp
:https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=155769388802752&w=2
https://github.com/snimmagadda/http?files=1
Might be useful to NetBSD ftp
Regards,

NetBSD's ftp(1) is much more than ftp protocol. It should stay, but if
there are patches against nbftp from Sunil or someone else, feel free to
contribute.

[Maxime Villard]

Post by Mouse

We are in 2019, and some people are still wasting their time
rewriting FTP clients.

Who are you - or I, or anyone else besides the author - to say that
such time is wasted?

Haha, that's a nice one.

--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

[Greg Troxel]

Post by Kamil Rytarowski

Post by Jay Patel
OpenBSD has recently added new ftp
:https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=155769388802752&w=2
https://github.com/snimmagadda/http?files=1
Might be useful to NetBSD ftp

NetBSD's ftp(1) is much more than ftp protocol. It should stay, but if
there are patches against nbftp from Sunil or someone else, feel free to
contribute.

Agreed. Another point is that if some other software is useful, a good
first step is to add it to pkgsrc. Then, if we ever get to the point
of seeing lots of mailinglist postings that say "Don't use foo in base;
install bar from pkgsrc instead", that's a clue. This is pretty rare.

--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

[Jason Thorpe]

Post by Greg Troxel
Agreed. Another point is that if some other software is useful, a good
first step is to add it to pkgsrc. Then, if we ever get to the point
of seeing lots of mailinglist postings that say "Don't use foo in base;
install bar from pkgsrc instead", that's a clue. This is pretty rare.

But so far, no one has said what this other ftp client has beyond what the lukemftp we already have in the base system can do.

-- thorpej


--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de

[Greg Troxel]

Post by Jason Thorpe

Post by Greg Troxel
Agreed. Another point is that if some other software is useful, a good
first step is to add it to pkgsrc. Then, if we ever get to the point
of seeing lots of mailinglist postings that say "Don't use foo in base;
install bar from pkgsrc instead", that's a clue. This is pretty rare.

But so far, no one has said what this other ftp client has beyond what
the lukemftp we already have in the base system can do.

I didn't mean to comment on the specifics. My point was merely that
putting things in pkgsrc has a low bar (where "duplicative and not quite
as good" isn't a real problem), and wip even lower. And, implicitly,
that I personally see something being packaged as a prerequisite to
discussion about adding it to base. Perhaps even packaged with a
multi-year history of a stable upstream, which I see from downthread
seems not where this is heading.

--
Posted automagically by a mail2news gateway at muc.de e.V.
Please direct questions, flames, donations, etc. to news-***@muc.de