Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:10:54 +0000 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Summary: Tell portupgrade to use passive ftp Message-ID: <20070322001054.1f05560b@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <4601B593.7050007@mac.com> References: <0EE4A357-FB1C-410D-BDF2-AF3A8BC7736B@goldmark.org> <20070319143905.7c69cc41@gumby.homeunix.com> <823E470A-93A8-4B6B-899A-E337FB75CABD@goldmark.org> <4601B593.7050007@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 14:45:39 -0800 "Peter A. Giessel" <pgiessel@mac.com> wrote: > On 2007/03/21 14:29, Jeffrey Goldberg seems to have typed: > > <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> > > Two reasons: > 1) FTP supports "resume" for a partial download Which is actually inferior to the support for byte-ranges in HTTP 1.1 Download utilities that support multiple TCP connections have to resort to breaking them to work with FTP.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070322001054.1f05560b>