delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
X-Spam-Check-By: | sourceware.org |
Message-ID: | <31b7d2790709140653u1fb8f970nb94c03155c0588b4@mail.gmail.com> |
Date: | Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:53:26 -0500 |
From: | "DePriest, Jason R." <jrdepriest AT gmail DOT com> |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Subject: | Re: sftp removing writable bit |
In-Reply-To: | <fcd9s6$v7e$1@sea.gmane.org> |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
References: | <46E7FB17 DOT 3030904 AT scranton DOT edu> <fc91pf$bic$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <fc953v$nf5$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <fcaj21$n7t$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <fcaoj2$44l$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <fcbmdp$f0s$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <fcbul0$b1r$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <fcd9s6$v7e$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> |
X-IsSubscribed: | yes |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.com> |
List-Unsubscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
On 9/14/07, Andrew DeFaria wrote: > Thorsten Kampe wrote: > > * Andrew DeFaria (Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:53:25 -0700) > >> Much less than the possibility of scp being present. And I'm not > >> necessarily against the idea of "well go out and get a working copy > >> of these programs" but often clients do not give consultants that > >> privilege. > > If your tools are limited or you do transfer just one file then scp is > > fine. > One file? scp can transfer whole trees... > > But if you want some comfort you should go for the other ones. > My point is the chances are better that scp will "just work" while sftp > probably won't be configured... > > By the way: this has nothing to do with scp versus sftp. And I'm not > > really sure what you mean by scp - do you mean the protocol or the > > command line tool? > Command line tool. IOW why go through the bother to set up an sftp > server (I assume that needs to be set up) and picking and getting an > sftp client when in all likelihood scp is already there and ready to > use. IOW what's the advantage of an sftp client over just plain scp? > > Anyway: if I haven't convinced you yet that sftp can have its uses and > > advantages then I probably never will. > That's funny I was thinking the same thing! > > Doesn't mean we can't discuss it though... > -- > Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com> > Everybody repeat after me ...We are all individuals. > sftp provides you with an FTP command set where scp does not that's about the only thing I can think of that makes a difference; seems like a compelling reason if you are going to be doing complex transfers, but if you are more familiar and comfortable with scp, then use it -Jason -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |