Agreed with what Uri said on convenience. Being able to use "scp" with the same syntax as "cp" is wired into a lot of peoples hands. sftp doesn't allow for the same easy syntax. Whatever is done to replace it should allow for that same easy syntax if you want to see adoption with a minimum of kicking & screaming. On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:38 AM Peter Stuge <peter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Jakub Jelen wrote: > > Any ideas/comments/suggestions? > > I doubt that upstream would drop the scp utility and protocol easily. > There is no point in breaking compatibility, so the scp utility would > stay at the very least for the benefit of remote scp clients. > > That said, I think it would be worthwhile to implement or at the very > least research the possibility of an SFTP client with scp semantics. > > You'd have to look closely at the protocols and scp man page, and it > could well turn out that the SFTP protocol doesn't currently offer > everything needed to provide full scp compatibility. > > I'd be interested to hear what you find, if you go ahead. > > > //Peter > _______________________________________________ > openssh-unix-dev mailing list > openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev > _______________________________________________ openssh-unix-dev mailing list openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
