George Langford on 15 Jun 2006 22:13:18 -0000


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [PLUG] Uploading files to a remote website with ftp


When I asked about the syntax for ftp'ing a bunch of files
to my webpage, I got a useful off-list reply suggesting
that I use mput and eliminate the path statements by cd'ing
to the website target directory and lcd'ing to the local
directory (Presto - I can be in two places at once !).  That
did the trick, and a simple mput * made 'em scoot right
over the wires to the appropriate location.

The Catch-22 hangup with wild cards remains a mystery, of course.

George Gallen said:

> You should be able to just say "mput /path/file*.*" as long
> as you entered "prompt" to disable the prompting for each file
> should transfer.

"Prompt" is illogical of course.  It's the equivalent of "GNU's
not Linux." I didn't try George's suggestion yet; I finessed the
question implied below by doing the cd'ing & lcd'ing, which
eliminated any difficulties with the path statement ... and I
would have had the chance to correct any errors in the path,
as linux won't go where ain't at.

> I'm not sure if you change the filenames on a multple put

You can if you're a glutton for punishment, but leaving the
second argument blank (no explicit target name change) causes
mput * to keep the names the same in both places.

And Jim helpfully suggested:

> If you don't have to use the command line, you could try
> gftp <http://gftp.org/>. I use it daily and I like it.  Not
> sure if that's your case or not.  Or, you can use midnight
> commander <http://www.ibiblio.org/mc/> or mc, which is
> command line as well, but it supports ftp.

> apt-get install mc gftp

I'll give that gftp a try.  Apt-get got it very quickly.  I was
really gettin' kinda used to CuteFTP, but that other OS has so
many hangups that I'm trying to wean myself away from it.  Why
do CuteFTP and PSIPlot work so well, when so many MS products
perform so awfully ?  PSIPlot hasn't changed a bit insofar as
operability is concerned - it was easy & graphical when it ran
under DOS 6.22, and it still looks and works the same - there's
just more features now.

Thanks to all !

Best regards,
George
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug