Messages in this thread |  | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Is sendfile all that sexy? | Date | 15 Jan 2001 12:15:08 -0800 |
| |
Followup to: <3A622C25.766F3BCE@pobox.com> By author: J Sloan <jjs@pobox.com> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > Of course, you may be right on wuftpd. It obviously wasn't designed with > > security in mind, other alternatives may be better. > > I run proftpd on all my ftp servers - it's fast, configurable > and can do all the tricks I need - even red hat seems to > agree that proftpd is the way to go. > > Visit any red hat ftp site and they are running proftpd - > > So, why do they keep shipping us wu-ftpd instead? > > That really frosts me. >
proftpd is not what you want for an FTP server whose main function is *non-*anonymous access. It is very much written for the sole purpose of being a great FTP server for a large anonymous FTP site. If you're running a site large enough to matter, you can replace an RPM or two.
-hpa -- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |