Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mail.misc > #970 > unrolled thread

Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ?

Back to article view | Back to comp.mail.misc

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2021-01-07 11:06 -0700
    Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2021-01-07 22:27 +0000
      Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Andrzej Adam Filip <anfi@onet.eu> - 2021-01-08 08:48 +0000
      Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2024-03-12 10:17 +0000
        Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-03-12 12:28 +0100
          Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-03-12 13:12 +0000
        Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> - 2024-03-12 10:31 -0300
          Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2024-03-12 21:45 -0500
            Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> - 2024-03-13 16:44 -0300
              Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2024-03-13 23:38 -0500
                Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? dbastos@ic.ufrj.br - 2024-03-14 08:12 -0300
                  Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-03-14 13:30 +0000
                  Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2024-03-14 21:18 -0500
                    Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-03-15 14:20 +0000
                      Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2024-03-15 15:54 -0500
                        Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Johanne Fairchild <jfairchild@tudado.org> - 2024-03-19 07:40 -0300
                          Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-03-19 13:20 +0000
                            Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2024-03-19 08:35 -0500
                              Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-03-19 14:45 +0000
                                Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2024-03-19 18:32 -0500
                          Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2024-03-19 08:26 -0500
            Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2024-03-19 15:46 +0000
        Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2024-03-13 05:56 +0000
          Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Eric Pozharski <apple.universe@posteo.net> - 2024-03-14 07:38 +0000
            Re: comp.mail.esmtp or comp.mail.mta ? Sovann Pacey <spacey@vapupe.com> - 2024-03-14 08:16 -0300

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#1195

On 3/19/24 05:40, Johanne Fairchild wrote:
> If I can't use it, it's not installed.

I'll allow for some wiggle room wherein I've had to add execute bit to 
files that exist in *nix more times than I care to.

I think that's more "enable" than it is "install".  Especially because 
the bytes were on the disk already.

A very close second to that is a rename, as in `mv file.disabled file` 
type thing.  But that's borderline install because the bytes weren't in 
the expected file name.



-- 
Grant. . . .

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1198

On 13/03/2024 02:45, Grant Taylor wrote:

> I think that it's better said that contemporary web browsers have 
> stopped supporting FTP protocol themselves.
> 
> Most, if not all, can be configured to use an external FTP program.

Indeed that seems to be it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1183

In comp.mail.misc,
Tristan Wibberley  <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
> On 07/01/2021 22:27, Eli the Bearded wrote:

That's longer than usual for a response to me.

>> ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/Group_Lists
> That's not available at my end, I get an error "FTP URLs are
> disabled".

That's a you problem.

> DoS by security? A signature would have sufficed.

Browser companies decided that they don't understand FTP and were tired
of fixing the bugs in their implementations. Meanwhile FTP clients have
no problems.

Elijah
------
misses the days of big FTP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1186

with <eli$2403130150@qaz.wtf> Eli the Bearded wrote:
> In comp.mail.misc,
> Tristan Wibberley  <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>> On 07/01/2021 22:27, Eli the Bearded wrote:

*SKIP* [  2 lines   1 level deep]
>>> ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/Group_Lists
>> That's not available at my end, I get an error "FTP URLs are
>> disabled".
> That's a you problem.

That's either a typo or very smart meme that went totally above my head.

>> DoS by security? A signature would have sufficed.
> Browser companies decided that they don't understand FTP and were
> tired of fixing the bugs in their implementations.

IOW, The Industry failed to invent ways to monetize it.

*CUT* [  7 lines   1 level deep]

-- 
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1188

Eric Pozharski <apple.universe@posteo.net> writes:

> with <eli$2403130150@qaz.wtf> Eli the Bearded wrote:
>> In comp.mail.misc,
>> Tristan Wibberley
>> <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:

[...]

>> Browser companies decided that they don't understand FTP and were
>> tired of fixing the bugs in their implementations.
>
> IOW, The Industry failed to invent ways to monetize it.

Well said.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.mail.misc

csiph-web