[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ange-ftp and sftp?
From: |
Phillip Lord |
Subject: |
Re: ange-ftp and sftp? |
Date: |
13 Jun 2005 11:17:11 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 |
>>>>> "Miles" == Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> writes:
Miles> Phillip Lord <p.lord@cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
>> It would probably be easier just to use tramp instead. I don't
>> know if it will do sftp, but I do know that it can tunnel
>> directly through ssh. I use this all the time.
>>
>> I suspect that you have never tried tramp. It's a fine package!
Miles> There was some discussion of this before, and the conclusion
Miles> reached was just the opposite.
Miles> Tramp works ok in it's domain, and is a valuable tool in
Miles> situations where nothing else works, but it's essentially
Miles> very inefficient (if you look at what it's doing you'll gag
Miles> on your wheaties). Ange-ftp, by relying on ftp's direct
Miles> support of various file-system operations, can be _much_ more
Miles> efficient (and more reliable) -- and sftp is basically like
Miles> ftp with many of the bogosities removed.
Miles> Certainly ange-ftp is an old and crufty mode, and probably
Miles> would need a bunch of work to eliminate assumptions about
Miles> ftp, but apparently tramp would need even more work to handle
Miles> sftp properly.
I didn't know this. From my perspective, efficiency is not that much
of an issue though. It would be nice if it ran a little quicker, but
it works well for me.
I'm guessing that tramp tries to abstract over the different transport
mechanisms, and so can't use their features as much?
Phil