From owner-freebsd-questions Sat Apr 25 00:12:37 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA18143 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 00:12:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from implode.root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id AAA18137 for ; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 00:12:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from root@implode.root.com) Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by implode.root.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA12051; Sat, 25 Apr 1998 00:10:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199804250710.AAA12051@implode.root.com> To: walton@nordicdms.com cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ftpd vs. wu-ftpd vs. ? In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 24 Apr 1998 20:22:28." <19980425032228720.AAA219@mail.nordicdms.com> From: David Greenman Reply-To: dg@root.com Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 00:10:27 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >Between the ftpd bundled with 2.2.6R and wu-ftpd, is there any >particular reason to use one over the other? What's the difference >between them? What does ftp.cdrom.com use, and why? wu-ftpd has a large selection of features, but is a total (memory/CPU) pig because of it. The stock ftpd is much less of a pig but has far fewer features. Wcarchive runs "dg-ftpd", which is my own version (and not publicly available). -DG David Greenman Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message