At 01:47 PM 11/4/00 -0800, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>I'm sorry, Mike, but my tests do not confirm what you say.
>
>If I connect to the HTTP site named below, I cannot test because it lists
>no files with the extension .img or .ima . The two images I name below
>appear here to have been re-suffixed a
I'm sorry, Mike, but my tests do not confirm what you say.
If I connect to the HTTP site named below, I cannot test because it lists no
files with the extension .img or .ima . The two images I name below appear
here to have been re-suffixed as .bin . As .bin files, they do download
properly as bi
At 01:55 PM 11/3/00 -0800, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>Discussions of theory are nice, but they need to be grounded in the facts.
>Here are some facts.
>
>At 12:02 PM 11/3/00 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote:
>
> >High-capacity File Server
> >http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=13751
> >ftp://
At 01:55 PM 11/3/00 -0800, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>Discussions of theory are nice, but they need to be grounded in the facts.
>Here are some facts.
>
>At 12:02 PM 11/3/00 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote:
>
> >High-capacity File Server
> >http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=13751
> >ftp://
Discussions of theory are nice, but they need to be grounded in the facts.
Here are some facts.
At 12:02 PM 11/3/00 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote:
>High-capacity File Server
>http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=13751
>ftp://download.sourceforge.net/pub/sourceforge/leaf/
I can connec
At 01:16 PM 11/3/00 -0600, David Douthitt wrote:
...
>Unless I'm mistaken, the FTP protocol has nothing whatsoever to do
>with mime-types, et al - only "ascii" or "bin" - and this only to do
>carriage-return conversions.
>
>Mime-types, I believe, are only present in HTTP downloads, which is
>wh
What IE does is documented. You just have to dig a little to find it.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/networking/moniker/overview/appendix_a.asp
At 10:55 AM 11/03/2000 -0800, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>Netscape trusts the accuracy the mime type reported by the Web server.
>Period. If it is wrong,
At 01:16 PM 11/3/00 -0600, David Douthitt wrote:
>On 3 Nov 2000, at 10:55, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>
> > At 01:16 PM 11/3/00 -0500, Rick Onanian wrote:
>
> > >However, it would be important to know how web browsers choose
> > >binary or ASCII for FTPing. I would guess that they do it
> > >based on th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> no, they trust the server's mime.types config file.
>
> the web admin, should add the 'img' extension/string to the
> 'application/octet-stream' entry on the mime.types
Please, people, while in this discussion, keep in mind that
we're talking about FTP, not HTTP.
Look
On 3 Nov 2000, at 10:55, Ray Olszewski wrote:
> At 01:16 PM 11/3/00 -0500, Rick Onanian wrote:
> >However, it would be important to know how web browsers choose
> >binary or ASCII for FTPing. I would guess that they do it
> >based on their own mime-type list.
>
> This has been discussed again a
It looks like this conversation may be moot. I just ran into a limitation
of the Anonymous FTP directory. Apparently, you can't chown a directory
once created, and only the person that creates the dir has write privileges.
I deleted the eigerstein and oxygen directories I created.
David and Ch
> -Original Message-
> From: Rick Onanian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 6:16 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Leaf-devel] Anonymous FTP
>
>
> Ray Olszewski wrote:
> > >Until proven otherwise, I would assume the
Ray Olszewski wrote:
> >However, it would be important to know how web browsers choose
> >binary or ASCII for FTPing. I would guess that they do it
> >based on their own mime-type list.
>
> This has been discussed again and again back on the LRP list. Neither of the
> major browsers does what you
On 3 Nov 2000, at 10:19, Ray Olszewski wrote:
> At 11:52 AM 11/3/00 -0600, David Douthitt wrote:
> >Another question: if I take module X from system X with kernel A, and
> >move module X to system Z with kernel A (same version kernel), is
> >this going to work assuming that system X and system
At 01:31 PM 11/3/00 -0500, Rick Onanian wrote:
>Can we please have Reply-to munging on? I just sent this to the LRP
>list...force of habit, automatic pilot, absent-mindedness, whatever...
Done. I may change it back though. It depends on possible solutions to the
member_posting_only=yes problem.
At 01:16 PM 11/3/00 -0500, Rick Onanian wrote:
...
>
>Web browsers are not good FTP clients.
True. But when you offer the ftp site from a Web-based link, you have to
anticipate that they will often be used to access the ftp site and take
account of their limitations.
Whether you like them or not
Can we please have Reply-to munging on? I just sent this to the LRP
list...force of habit, automatic pilot, absent-mindedness, whatever...
Ray Olszewski wrote:
> Just to be clear, Rick ... my experience compiling kernels (pretty much
> limited to 2.0.36, 2.2.13, and 2.2.17 ... but I can't imagin
At 10:25 AM 11/3/00 -0800, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>At 09:53 AM 11/3/00 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote:
>...
> >
> >Until proven otherwise, I would assume the default ftp download would
> >be binary. This may bite me later.
>
>It's already "bit" us, I think.
>
>Isn't my report from yesterday a valid counter
Ray Olszewski wrote:
> >Until proven otherwise, I would assume the default ftp download would be
> >binary. This may bite me later.
>
> It's already "bit" us, I think.
>
> Isn't my report from yesterday a valid counter-example to your assumption?
> Surely Sourceforge didn't *explicitly* make the
At 01:04 PM 11/3/00 -0500, Rick Onanian wrote:
...
>Kernel modules are more flexible than we give them credit for.
>
>If you compile 2.2.16 kernels on five machines, each with their
>own configurations and each compiling different modules, then
>the modules compiled on one are very likely to work
At 09:53 AM 11/3/00 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote:
...
>
>Until proven otherwise, I would assume the default ftp download would be
>binary. This may bite me later.
It's already "bit" us, I think.
Isn't my report from yesterday a valid counter-example to your assumption?
Surely Sourceforge didn't *exp
David Douthitt wrote:
> Another question: if I take module X from system X with kernel A, and
> move module X to system Z with kernel A (same version kernel), is
> this going to work assuming that system X and system Z are binary-
> compatible?
Kernel modules are more flexible than we give them c
At 11:52 AM 11/3/00 -0600, David Douthitt wrote:
>On 3 Nov 2000, at 9:27, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>
>> Or possibly the modules should just be in with the kernel, all in a
>> single tarball ...
>
>This is the way the LRP kernels were bundled; despite the large size,
>I appreciated it since all the m
At 09:27 AM 11/3/00 -0800, Ray Olszewski wrote:
>At 08:51 AM 11/3/00 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote:
> >At 07:59 AM 11/3/00 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote:
> >>I just created Anonymous FTP directories for eigerstein and oxygen.
> >>
> >>ftp://leaf.sourceforge.net/pub/leaf/
> >
> >Should we create kernel and mod
On 3 Nov 2000, at 9:27, Ray Olszewski wrote:
> Or possibly the modules should just be in with the kernel, all in a
> single tarball ...
This is the way the LRP kernels were bundled; despite the large size,
I appreciated it since all the modules were included with the Linux
kernel - no mistaki
At 08:51 AM 11/3/00 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote:
>At 07:59 AM 11/3/00 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote:
>>I just created Anonymous FTP directories for eigerstein and oxygen.
>>
>>ftp://leaf.sourceforge.net/pub/leaf/
>
>Should we create kernel and module directories in the Anonymous FTP area?
It might be bette
At 07:59 AM 11/3/00 -0800, Mike Noyes wrote:
>I just created Anonymous FTP directories for eigerstein and oxygen.
>
>ftp://leaf.sourceforge.net/pub/leaf/
Should we create kernel and module directories in the Anonymous FTP area?
--
Mike Noyes
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://sourceforge.net/projects/leaf
27 matches
Mail list logo
