similar to: [Bug 181] Undocumented mget and mput in sftp

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181 ------- Additional Comments From jason at rndpkt.org 2002-03-28 15:26 ------- mget and mput are just "aliased" commands to get and put, I'm assuming for some kind of compatability. mget and mput expect the get and put parameters and DO NOT function like FTP-based mget and mput (i.e. mget file1 file2.. file#). I'd be happy

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181 Summary: Undocumented mget and mput in sftp Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 3.1p1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: trivial Priority: P5 Component: sftp AssignedTo: openssh-unix-dev at mindrot.org ReportedBy: Maldoror at

A couple of notes about mget/mput in SFTP (5.1p1). 1. They aren't documented in the SFTP man page 2 They misbehave -- "mput a.txt b.txt" copies a.txt to b.txt on the server "mput *.txt b.txt" copies the first wildcard match to b.txt on the server "mput a.txt b.txt c.txt" copies a.txt to b.txt on the server "mput a.txt

Dear folks. Was hoping it had to do with the release, but have also tested in 4.4.16 and the issue is also there. I am aware a RHEL/CEntOS based upon 6 distribution is not the most up to date version I should test this on, as it also limits how easy is compiling most recent versions of Samba, but I assume though this is not a tricky test, and should work as documented in both 4.4 and 4.2

Dear Rowland. So sorry, I did not get the responses to this e-mail address, got them by the purest change googling again. I'm sorry to disagree with your approach: 1-. In my most recent updates you should have seen I am compiling Samba4 from source. Began with packaged distribution, but considering it might be a bug, I decided to test myself. 4 different versions, same behaviour. This means

Dear Jeremy. Really appreciate you took your time to answer. I had already reviewed source4/client/client.c looking for mput (cmd_mput) command, but unluckily saying that my C programming skills are poor woud be really overrating them. I'm sorry to disagree for two reasons 1-. It works for mget, true that the source code is completely different. 2-. If taking a look into smbclient man

Dear folks. I am using smbclient 4.2.10 version (the one packaged for OEL 6, samba4-client-4.2.10-15.el6.x86_64), and observing a weird behaviour of the tool. I've got a Linux local directorio, say /tmp/eraseme, with a couple of subdirectories in it, say a and b, each one containing a dummy file, say a/AM.xls and b/AT.xls If I run: smbclient -d 30 -l /var/log/samba -m SMB3 -W

Dear all. I would like to propose a possible way to make mget and mput behave more or less the same way, rather that just changing documentation. Please, bear in mind this is a poor attempt coming from a person with no C skills at all, so other than testing that only filtered files are transferred, I have not gone further. Hope at least to have been able not to corrupt any pointer, but I'm

Dear fellows. Another piece of information. The issue reprduces on RHEL 7.7, Samba 4.9.1 [root at vnhprerhds01 ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.7 (Maipo) [root at vnhprerhds01 ~]# smbclient -V Version 4.9.1 [root at vnhprerhds01 ~]# smbclient -W "${d}" -U "${u}" "${s}" "${p}" Try "help" to get a list of

A new update. Same behaviour with 4.6.16. Exact issue as Bug 1249. Many thanks. Kind regards. El lun., 24 ago. 2020 a las 12:23, LPC DPG (<lpcdpg at gmail.com>) escribi?: > Dear folks. > > Was hoping it had to do with the release, but have also tested in 4.4.16 > and the issue is also there. I am aware a RHEL/CEntOS based upon 6 > distribution is not the most up to date

Dear all. Confirmed: compilation of 4.12.6 produces same result, mput + recurse ignores mask for files. Will you please tell me if you need further details, or which steps I should follow? Should I file a bug? Many thanks. Best regards. El mar., 25 ago. 2020 a las 9:52, LPC DPG (<lpcdpg at gmail.com>) escribi?: > Dear Andrew. > > You are right, I should have taken a deeper look

Things consider problems with sftp software - sftp manually first time to accept the fingerprint and anytime software is updated on host. - no ascii mode only binary - no verbose or indication of bytes transfered (you would do an ls after sftp is done) - no mput or mget (this may be a show stopper) but could script could generate itself with all the filenames takes coding. Kenneth

On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 09:15:48PM +0200, LPC DPG via samba wrote: > Dear fellows. > > Another piece of information. The issue reprduces on RHEL 7.7, Samba 4.9.1 > > [root at vnhprerhds01 ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release > Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.7 (Maipo) > [root at vnhprerhds01 ~]# smbclient -V > Version 4.9.1 > > [root at vnhprerhds01 ~]# smbclient

Dear Andrew. You are right, I should have taken a deeper look into the standard output during compilation. I did just assume source4 was the one for Samba4. Anyway, besides the source confusion (really, even if I had found the right one, following the code would have been out of my reach), I don't seem to find how that is related with the documentation issue, or the mput/mask/recurse

This is the final results of sftp on SCO OpenServer. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:27:51 -0700 From: Greg Jewell <gjewell at cnnxn.com> To: mouring at etoh.eviladmin.org Subject: RE: Problems with sftp under SCO OpenServer > -----Original Message----- > From: mouring at etoh.eviladmin.org [mailto:mouring at etoh.eviladmin.org] > Sent: Monday,

I am currently running OpenSSH 4.3. I would like to restrict the commands SFTP users can run to a list. For example, "put, get, mput, mget, mkdir, rmdir, and rm". Is this possible with OpenSSH? I have seen many posts concerning chroot'ing and the Forced Command option, but none of these solution address restricting the commands actually available inside the SFTP subsystem. Any

Samba 2.0.7 running on Compaq Tru64 UNIX V5.0A with latest tru64 patches. "mget *" works OK, "mput *" or something like "mput *.bat" fails with the error message "find: bad option -maxdepth". Several questions - Anyone else come across this one? Would dropping back to 2.0.6 fix the problem? Could it be an issue with 2.0.7 on Tru64 V5? Regards, Brian

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=742 mouring at eviladmin.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |enhancement Summary|sftp doesn't honor "Protocol|Allow sftp to read config |1" in config

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200 Ben Lindstrom <mouring at eviladmin.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #59 is|0 |1 obsolete| | --- Comment #6 from Ben Lindstrom <mouring at

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40 mouring at eviladmin.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED ------- Additional Comments From mouring at eviladmin.org 2002-04-06