Date: Tue, 06 Jan 1998 11:08:06 +1030 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Time to retire fetch? Message-ID: <199801060038.LAA00365@word.smith.net.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 05 Jan 1998 02:03:56 -0800." <4721.883994636@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I just noticed that FTP in -current now supports http:// style > fetches, a feature which seems to have crept in under my nose during > the sync with NetBSD's ftp client. Given that, the questions now in > my mind are: > > 1. Do we want to retire fetch and just use ftp now as our > FETCH_CMD in -current? Would any fetch features be missed > that would also be overtly difficult to merge into the ftp > client? Strengthening one tool rather than putting two > into competition is obviously a worthy goal if it's possible > to do it. We had this "discussion" when the new FTP arrived. Garrett was a little defensive about his baby, and pointed out that fetch does some things better than ftp does. In particular, fetch is the one sample T/TCP application we have; a search of the archives would probably turn up the body of the discussion. I certainly felt that it would make more sense to integrate the two, but that abandoning fetch outright might be a little precipitate. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199801060038.LAA00365>