Re: [RFR] fex package
Impressive; I dget a copy to look at and it's already incorporated
my suggestions!
Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> Justin B Rye:
>> (So shouldn't the package have a "Depends: apache2 | httpd" field?)
>
> No, it comes with its own web server
I don't see any /usr/sbin/fex... or anything in /etc/init.d/... to
me it looks like a bunch of CGI-scripts. But assuming you're right,
shouldn't it "Provides: httpd", or possibly "Conflicts"? Does it
take over port 80?
>> (Even if my web server has a 1GB hard drive?
>
> Obviously no :)
It's not inconceivable that it could hold files in RAM, or chop them
up and stream them around the Net in a constant bittorrent juggling
act! But instead it just uses a protocol with no intrinsic cap on
file size... just like all the others. So what makes F*EX so
particularly suitable for transferring large, huge, giant files?
>> Since when has there
>> been a file size limit for SMTP, anyway?
>
> Yes, mail is needed only to receive a link.
Why not just mail the file? Or up/download it via FTP? These
methods may have disadvantages, but none of them intrinsically limit
the file size, so I don't understand why F*EX is advertised so
heavily on this basis.
>> And does this F*EX
>> transfer really go over the net uncompressed and unencrypted?)
>
> There is a doc/SSL that explains how to setup fex web server with SSL
I see no explanation in /usr/share/doc/fex/SSL - only a shell
fragment with undeclared dependencies on openssl and xinetd (as
opposed to openbsd-inetd, which _is_ in the package dependencies).
Data transferred unencrypted by default, authentication via
passwords sent in e-mails... this software was first released in
March, yet it's doing a passable impression of a nineties relic.
Presumably it has some big advantage that makes up for all this, but
I can't work out quite what its selling point is, given that it's
taken for granted that I have root access on a web-accessible host.
>> * shell clients provided for commandline users: fexsend and fexget.
>>
>> (I need to install the server to get these clients?)
>
> No, you need to install fex-utils
If they're not in fex (or a package fex depends on), fex's package
description shouldn't promise to provide them. Instead there should
be a pointer to the package that does provide them.
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Reply to: