Frustration: put after URL...

Dave Cragg dcragg at
Tue Feb 21 02:38:36 EST 2006

On 20 Feb 2006, at 23:51, Thomas McCarthy wrote:
> Yes, I was looking for efficiency as well as privacy (not to  
> mention simplicity!). I didn't want to do this via getting a cgi;  
> as I understand it, those calls can be read. (is this still true if  
> one does it through rev and not with the user's browser?)

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "read". But in terms of data  
going over the wire, ftp is just as readable as http/cgi. If you mean  
that the workings of a cgi form can be easily read by looking at the  
html source, then this is easily hidden in a Rev stack.

> However, if there is a question of some users' system settings  
> blocking this, as Bruce said, then I will rework it into a cgi  
> call. There are some other parts of the program that use  
> 'put...after url' for updating records, so I'll rework those as well.

I've had a couple of reports of ftp troubles with 2.7. There is a  
small change in the libUrl version distributed with 2.7 that affects  
ftp transfers (designed to get around a problem a few users had  
reported with previous versions). However, I'm waiting for "log  
reports" to see if the problems and the change are connected in any  
way. If you could get the transaction data for the bad ftp calls  
(libUrlSetLogField), I'll take a look .


More information about the Use-livecode mailing list