[REBOL] Re: ftp chmod!!
From: maximo:meteorstudios at: 6-Aug-2003 10:52
From: Petr Krenzelok [mailto:[cant_nab_this_mail_address--localhost]]
> Yes, exactly - but it is for gurus only.
>
> I could see lots of similar questions asked on ml, that is
> why I would
> prefer Rebol being able to handle such case/anomaly natively.
IF they apply fixes that we find ASAP, then we'll all be happy!
> From talks to Reichart I know that FTP is probably the most screwed
> "standard".
I read a little of the ftp rfc and yess it a lot of "history"...
it was continually updated from 1973 to 1985...
> Well - I think that no matter what command what
> FTP server
> supports, we should enrich rebol's scheme each time we find
> new problem
> and its solution, instead of suggesting of usign sub-port, as
> there can
> be ppl as me, who will not be able to solve such problem by simply
> suggesting how to hack it around
I think I'll send my patch to rebol feedback , once its had a little more testing and
(maybe) debating here. But it sure would be cool to find a way to supply the chmod mode
as an option of the ftp scheme (like having an enable chmod flag, in the ftp port, with
a list of extensions which should get chmoded ). There could then be a simple function
which sets up the ftp handler to enable chmod or not.
we could also debate on if we want to add a new protocol (such as chmodftp://user:passwd:[umask--domain]/path/file.ext)
which explicitely handles chmod on any file transfer, without looking for a .cgi in the
target filename...
Gabrielle's idea about set-modes get-modes is also a nifty one, I have no time to research
it right now, though (really ;-).
-MAx
