At Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:41:52 -0400 (EDT) CentOS mailing list <centos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I had a problem wherein running a script with an embedded ftp call
> would work in the login shell during integration testing and then
> fail with an unrecognized option error in cron during acceptance
> testing.
>
> In solving this I discovered that RedHat, and therefore CentOS,
> ships with at least two ftp clients, /usr/bin/ftp ( which I thought
> I was using ) and /usr/kerberos/bin/ftp, which I actually was using.
> even though I had no inkling of its existence.
>
> My question is why? Why are there two ftp clients provided in a
> single distribution and why is the kerberos version effectively made
> the default whereas one might reasonably assume that anything in
> /usr/bin/ is the standard ( and by inference default ) ftp client
> for the distribution? If kerberos ftp is intended to be the default
> ftp client then why is it not in, or at least linked to from,
> /usr/bin?
>
> I just do not understand why these obscure distribution 'gotchas'
> are created in the first place, much less permitted to persist.
Does this give you a clue:
gollum.deepsoft.com% rpm -qf /usr/kerberos/bin/ftp /usr/bin/ftp
krb5-workstation-1.6.1-55.el5_6.2
ftp-0.17-35.el5
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / heller@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
