On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:59:13AM -0800, Dave Meyer wrote:
> I've put together my first version (well, first public version) of a patch
> to handle ftp server REST inconsistencies.
[...]

Here are a few thoughts of mine on perusing the patch.

I noticed two assumptions in the code: that off_t is signed, and that the
ftp server will always return a message along with a 350 error code. Strange
things will happen if these assumptions are wrong; it's worth verifying that
they're true.

I have the same feeling about the REST offset halving algorithm. If a
REST fails at 2 GiB - 1, why would it succeed at a lower value? If there
isn't such a scenario, then it's extra baggage.

Also, will this patch interfere with the minimum bandwidth limit code? If
the program has to sit and wait while 500 MB of data is downloaded to
/dev/null, will it wait quietly? Will the periodic progress display still
be called?

>>> Dan

-- 
http://www.MoveAnnouncer.com              The web change of address service
          Let webmasters know that your web site has moved
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.
Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills.  Sign up for IBM's
Free Linux Tutorials.  Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin.
Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click