scp vs sftp.

[Markus Friedl]

Yes you are probably right :)

my computer was running out of battery when i was typing the mail.

now that sftp is becomming a 'standard' is the more general solution.

it would be nice if someone could add support for the
sftp-protocol to scp.

note also, that sftp works fine over the ssh protocol version
1 in openssh (sftp -1 host).

-markus


On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 09:06:14AM +0100, Mats Andersson wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Markus Friedl wrote:
> > fast and simple: scp
> > slow and complex: sftp
> 
> :-)
> 
> Well, while I do agree that scp is fast and simple (after all it's a clone
> of rcp), I must say that sftp IMHO is not very complex though it might
> have its shortcomings. I would like to put it:
> 
> scp: fast/simple protocol for replacing rcp in scripts similar for moving
> files across an arbitrary transport such as ssh.
> 
> sftp: rather clean/general protocol for implementing remote filesystem
> access across an arbitrary transport such as ssh.
> 
> Note that I'm speaking of the protocols here, as for the client/server
> implementations I have nothing to say... :-)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> /Mats