X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org To: cygwin@cygwin.com From: Andrew DeFaria Subject: Re: sftp removing writable bit Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 09:05:17 -0700 Lines: 18 Message-ID: References: <46E7FB17.3030904@scranton.edu> <31b7d2790709140653u1fb8f970nb94c03155c0588b4@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) In-Reply-To: <31b7d2790709140653u1fb8f970nb94c03155c0588b4@mail.gmail.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com DePriest, Jason R. wrote: > 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 Hey I'm just trying to learn... What "complex transfers" are possible in the ftp command set that are not possible with scp/ssh? Hey, I agree, use whatever you are more comfortable with I guess. I just think it makes a lot more sense to just use the basic command set, perhaps extended with the "s" commands for remote files, rather than set up sftp and use a different command set. IOW I've never seen the need to set up sftp and use it over just using the "s" commands... -- Andrew DeFaria Did anyone see my lost carrier? -- 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/