Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 17:10:30 +0600 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@nsu.ru> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, cvs-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/lukemftpd - Imported sources Message-ID: <20021113111030.GA83756@regency.nsu.ru> In-Reply-To: <20021112171203.GB59816@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <200211120642.gAC6gfg0043798@repoman.freebsd.org> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1021112090605.34156A-100000@fledge.watson.org> <20021112171203.GB59816@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 09:12:03AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 09:15:53AM -0500, Robert Watson wrote: > > > Lukemftpd *cannot* be the suggested FTPd. > > Why?? It works fine for many and I've seen many installations use it > that find the "regular" ftpd *way* too feature limited for any ftp site > on the naked Internet. AFAIC, regular ftpd is more secure and robust than lukemftpd. I've seen reports in the past saying that performance issues in lukemftpd are unavoidable WRT fixing them. Until we get performance and security up to what we have in ftpd right now, IMHO it's rather meaningless to compare features. FWIW, if one doesn't like stock ftpd, there are plenty in ports. ./danfe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021113111030.GA83756>