| 1 |
"Walter Dnes" <waltdnes@××××××××.org> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>> transferring large amounts of data and automatization in processing at |
| 4 |
>> least some of it, without involving a 3rd party |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> "Large amounts" can be "small" like 100MB --- or over 50k files in 12GB, |
| 7 |
>> or even more. The mirror feature of lftp is extremely useful for such |
| 8 |
>> things. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> I wouldn't ever want having to mess around with web pages to figure out |
| 11 |
>> how to do this. Ftp is plain and simple. So you see why I'm explicitly |
| 12 |
>> asking for a replacement which is at least as good as ftp. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> How about "wget"? It can handle ftp and http, and it can be scripted. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Explain to someone unable to use Filezilla how to do that ... |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I'd have to look up if wget can do ftp with TLS. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> And it can discriminate on timestamps, i.e. only download a file if it |
| 21 |
> has been changed since the latest download at your site. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Then there's always "sneakernet". To quote Andrew Tanenbaum from 1981 |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
>> Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes |
| 26 |
>> hurtling down the highway. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Hm, I'll suggest that, thanks. Ppl might be more likely to think they |
| 29 |
should be able to burn DVDs and send them in the mail than they are to |
| 30 |
think they could use something much simpler, easier, faster and more |
| 31 |
secure, like ftp ... |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
"Didn't work" is an error. |
Archives