Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 18:23:54 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> Cc: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami), junkmale@xtra.co.nz, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FTP passive mode - a new default? Message-ID: <17703.927941034@zippy.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "29 May 1999 03:20:08 %2B0200." <xzp4skwoenr.fsf@localhost.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
No, you're the one who's wrong, the source is simply the source. :-) My only point was that you should make sure something is a certain way before you offer advice for dealing with its *current* behavior since, otherwise, that's just confusing to everyone. Either way, I don't think that *any* of the current sources, from libfetch to libftpio, are currently doing anything "right" with FTP_PASSIVE_MODE and hence this debate is also 100% academic for the time being. :-) - Jordan > "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> writes: > > > If we just set FTP_PASSIVE_MODE=YES in /etc/login.conf or > > > /etc/profile, all the user needs to do is set FTP_PASSIVE_MODE=NO > > > before trying to fetch the port. > > Heh, no. UTSL. All the code which checks this, checks to see if it's > > set to anything at all, not if it's set explicitly to YES. :) > > In that case, the source is wrong. > > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?17703.927941034>