PROFTPD
joe
joe at tmsusa.com
Wed Oct 22 23:06:28 UTC 2003
Res wrote:
>On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
>
>
>>Ronny Buchmann (ronny-vlug at vlugnet.org) said:
>>
>>
>>>>No. We prefer the security history of vsftpd. :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>So why not use pureftpd?
>>>
>>>
>>Because we haven't had problems with vsftpd, and it's had both
>>a good stability and performance record in our use. (i.e., if
>>it isn't broken, don't fix it...)
>>
>>
>
>One problem Bill, vsftpd is useless in a virtual situation where you have
>multiple customers, one copy of the program and a config file for each
>customer, with proftpd we do it with just 1 sole config file, not with
>hundreds of them.
>
>
Some folks prefer that kind of modularity - neat and clean, you don't
muck about with one huge config file, it's all separated.
The only thing I miss about proftpd is being able to say "ftpwho"
>Though, we do run vsftpd on our anonymous ftpd cause it doesnt have to
>do anything else :)
>
>
hmm, a linux box that does only one thing? sounds like a lot of wasted
computing power ;-)
Joe
More information about the fedora-test-list
mailing list