Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 17:29:03 -0500 From: Jeffrey Goldberg <jeffrey@goldmark.org> To: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Summary: Tell portupgrade to use passive ftp Message-ID: <823E470A-93A8-4B6B-899A-E337FB75CABD@goldmark.org> In-Reply-To: <20070319143905.7c69cc41@gumby.homeunix.com> References: <0EE4A357-FB1C-410D-BDF2-AF3A8BC7736B@goldmark.org> <20070319143905.7c69cc41@gumby.homeunix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I asked how to pass the -p argument to fetch when doing a port upgrade.
Answers here, and further digging confirm that the presuppositions
behind my question were wrong.
First of all, the problem that I was having had nothing to do with
active vs passive FTP. I had butchered all FTP traffic with my
firewall rules.
<Rant>
As an aside, I'd like to rant that there is no reason for ftp to
exist anymore. Sure it is stateful in a way that HTTP isn't, but
that isn't enough to justify its continued use.
<Qualification>
Of course having recently displayed my ignorance of how these
things work,
I'm in no position to make such proclamations.
</Qualification>
</Rant>
By default (at least in 6.2-RELEASE) fetch is called with the -p
option, thus making my request to the list even less coherent. This
is defined by
FETCH_ARGS?= -ApRr
in bsd.port.mk
<Rant>
As far as I can tell this and many other configuration options are not
documented anywhere outside of the .mk files themselves. Is that
really how
things should be?
</Rant>
Anyway, I'd like to thank everyone for their help and patience.
-j
--
Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?823E470A-93A8-4B6B-899A-E337FB75CABD>