4 ms·
I would rather say ssh (scp) is the new ftp.
by bnegreve 14y ago
I would rather say ssh (scp) is the new ftp.
- tspiteri 14y agoAnd it comes with a compatibility mode (sftp).
- olalonde 14y agoNot really: > SFTP is not FTP run over SSH, but rather a new protocol designed from the ground up by the IETF SECSH working group. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSH_File_Transfer_Protocol http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSH_File_Transfer_Protocol
- tspiteri 14y agoI know it's not ftp over ssh. I meant what I said in the context of the original comment; if ssh is the ftp replacement, then there is an application which transfers files over ssh with commands similar to those of ftp, which is sort of a compatibility mode to help ftp users migrate to ssh. (Although it is a new protocol from the ground up, it is usually used as a subsystem of ssh, thus using the same passwords and authentications and stuff.)
- jedbrown 14y agoBah, I can't think of a case where the user interface of ftp is so precious it can't be replaced with rsync or sshfs.
- danbee 14y agoYou're thinking of FTPS.
- polyfractal 14y agoI just found out recently that SCP is horribly slow when transferring lots of small files. I found a blog post showing how to send compressed tarballs over SSH and it worked really well: ssh username@from_server "tar czf - directory_to_get" | tar xzvf - -C path_to_save
- regularfry 14y agoThe trick is knowing when that's going to be faster than rsync.
- zemo 14y ago...or use rsync? rsync -avz somehost:/path/to/src /path/to/dest
- jackalope 14y agoFor a more accurate sync, you can also delete obsolete files on the destination: rsync -avz --delete src dest This assumes there are no files you want to keep on the destination, of course. You can exclude them or reorganize to keep them safe.