3 ms·
I dunno, that feels very BSD to me. Presumably, they had a ftp utility first, and then when somebody wanted to download files over http they looked around and d
by yjftsjthsd-h 4mo ago
I dunno, that feels very BSD to me. Presumably, they had a ftp utility first, and then when somebody wanted to download files over http they looked around and decided that the obvious thing to do was to add it to the existing file transfer/download program. Same as continuing to add functions to ifconfig rather than inventing a new ip tool.
- dessimus 4mo agoSure, if those functions added were related to configuring network interfaces, but it would be odd if someone added functions for configuring storage controllers.
- lmm 4mo agoImagine using an ftp program to transfer files.
- dessimus 4mo agoBitTorrent transfers files, so should a BT client be bolted on too? Typically the Unix philosophy has been do one thing well, not do all the things.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4mo agoThe sticking point is always what "one thing" is. I can certainly see an argument for "download a file over http" (or, for another program, ftp), but I can also see an argument for "download files over the internet". In which case, honestly the only reason I'd even quirk an eyebrow at a BSD's ftp(1) adding bittorrent support is that bittorrent usually means running a daemon that that does feel out of character for it. But even then I wouldn't be that surprised to see it added.