Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 05:49:00 +0300 (MSK) From: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru> To: Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu> Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Time to retire fetch? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980107054325.9983A-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net> In-Reply-To: <199801051140.DAA10749@baloon.mimi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, Satoshi Asami wrote: > To me, 3 sounds like the best approach. However, we need to make sure > fetch an ftp are compatible in all senses (e.g., whether you include > the full path when you go to a on-the-fly tarballing site). I > remember ache mumbling something about non-anonymous ftp too. fetch now supports HTTP 1.1, user:password auth for both ftp and http and restart feature for both ftp and http. Next thing is TCP optimization (also with conflict with some sites, which can be resolved by adding an option). If new ftp not provide the same features (I don't check at this moment), my word is definitely against switching. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nietzsche.net> http://www.nagual.pp.ru/~ache/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980107054325.9983A-100000>