Re: sftp rename not good.

[Dan O'Reilly <dano%process.com@localhost>]

At 07:40 PM 5/13/2003, Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 06:19:16PM -0600, Dan O'Reilly wrote:
> > At 05:35 PM 5/13/2003, Nicolas Williams wrote:
> > >If the client doesn't care, then the semantics of rename should be upto
> > >the server (within some parameters? which parameters?).
> > >
> > >But I think the client cares, or, rather, this user cares :) :)
> >
> > Well, actually, I agree with you, and you've made my point.  The client
> > doesn't care, but the user does.  And a user on a VMS system will expect
> > to see things done the way VMS does things, just as a user on a UNIX
> > system will expect to see things done with way UNIX does things.  So, if
> > the functionality is left up to the server, it accomplishes that quick
> > nicely.
>
> Quite convincing.  I'm afraid that scripted clients may nonetheless need
> to know what semantics are implemented on the server side, or at least
> what platform it is.  But overall I agree with you, let the server do as
> it will, and possibly, give the client a hint.

I've often wondered why there wasn't a provision for that "hint"; some sort
of optional part of some initialization message that the server could use
to inform the client (and, I suppose, vice-versa) of what system is
running.  I have to believe there would be some good uses for that.

------
+-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+
| Dan O'Reilly                  |  "There are 10 types of people in this |
| Principal Engineer            |   world: those who understand binary   |
| Process Software              |   and those who don't."                |
| http://www.process.com        |                                        |
+-------------------------------+----------------------------------------+