After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 170577 - Not all ftp daemons support LIST -L; can the ftp module fall back to a plain LIST?
Not all ftp daemons support LIST -L; can the ftp module fall back to a plain ...
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gnome-vfs
Classification: Deprecated
Component: Module: ftp
cvs (head)
Other All
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: gnome-vfs maintainers
gnome-vfs maintainers
: 170926 (view as bug list)
Depends on: 48427
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-03-16 16:18 UTC by Stewart Jeacocke
Modified: 2005-06-05 14:10 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.9/2.10


Description Stewart Jeacocke 2005-03-16 16:18:05 UTC 
Distribution/Version: Debian Sarge

Not all ftp daemons support "LIST -L" and my reading of the RFC suggests that
they are not required to. The FTP module will fail on these deamons (expect for
the case of OS X where there is some special code already included). This has
resulted in at least one bug report to Debian see bug 251051 [1]. In this
particular case the user was trying to access an ftp daemon provided by the
Jungerl project [2]. 

Rather that having to add special cases for each daemon that doesn't provide
"LIST -L" would it be possible to fall back to a plain "LIST" if the "LIST -L"
fails?

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=251051
[2] http://jungerl.sourceforge.net/
Comment 1 Christian Neumair 2005-05-09 17:53:56 UTC 
Thanks for your bug report. Although it might seem a bit rare to have such an
FTP server, it would be nice to handle it appropriately. Marking this bug as
dependant on bug 48427, since the latter has a patch attached (attachment 46249 [details] [review])
which should also fix the issue you reported.
Comment 2 Sebastien Bacher 2005-06-05 14:10:17 UTC 
*** Bug 170926 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***