On Wednesday 01 March 2006 14:15, Daniel A. wrote:
> On 3/1/06, gh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Monday 20 February 2006 13:04, Daniel A. wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I have the same issue here.
> > > When I use SFTP (WinSCP) to transfer from my Windows XP SP2 box to my
> > > local server, I can only
On 3/1/06, gh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 20 February 2006 13:04, Daniel A. wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have the same issue here.
> > When I use SFTP (WinSCP) to transfer from my Windows XP SP2 box to my
> > local server, I can only utilize about 1/10'th of the bandwith
> > (100mbit).
> > On th
On Monday 20 February 2006 13:04, Daniel A. wrote:
> Hi,
> I have the same issue here.
> When I use SFTP (WinSCP) to transfer from my Windows XP SP2 box to my
> local server, I can only utilize about 1/10'th of the bandwith
> (100mbit).
> On the other hand, when I use FTP or SMB to transfer files,
On 2/21/06, Xn Nooby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> would doing a 'make install clean' inside /usr/ports/security/hpn-ssh fix
> the default scp program?
You should install hpn-ssh on both hosts. There's a
windows binary available on the website.
___
freeb
ix this problem in sshd/ssh.
>
> Check out the patches home page at
> http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Martin
> Hepworth
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 2:1
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 2:16 PM
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: WinSCP mega-slowness
Hate to do a me too, but I gotta agree.
I did the same file transfer using cygwin's scp and winscp and cygwin
was
about 10x faster.
On 2/20/06, Xn Nooby <[EMAIL PROTECTED
Hate to do a me too, but I gotta agree.
I did the same file transfer using cygwin's scp and winscp and cygwin was
about 10x faster.
On 2/20/06, Xn Nooby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> For about a year I have noticed that whenever my Windows boxes talk to my
> Unix boxes, they communicate at
I can try that. I'm not sure how to use Samba3, though. I was trying to
help a friend use Samba, but I was use to Sama2, and Samba3 apparently
recquires a smb.conf file. You use to be able to just do everything from
the command line, like (I think):
smbclient //server/share /mnt/pnt -o
usern
Hi,
I have the same issue here.
When I use SFTP (WinSCP) to transfer from my Windows XP SP2 box to my
local server, I can only utilize about 1/10'th of the bandwith
(100mbit).
On the other hand, when I use FTP or SMB to transfer files, I can
utilize the maximum bandwith.
On both boxes, the "sympto
> Well, it's good to know I'm not the only one seing this. Right now both
> machines are running FreeBSD, since I gave up on waiting for Windows to
> copy
> the files. The CPU load on Window when sending 1 meg per second is
> usually
> about 30%, while the Unix box is only at 1-2%. When I have 2
Well, it's good to know I'm not the only one seing this. Right now both
machines are running FreeBSD, since I gave up on waiting for Windows to copy
the files. The CPU load on Window when sending 1 meg per second is usually
about 30%, while the Unix box is only at 1-2%. When I have 2 Unix boxes
On 2/20/06, Xn Nooby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For about a year I have noticed that whenever my Windows boxes talk to my
> Unix boxes, they communicate at about 1/10 normal speed. I copy lots (300GB)
> of large files back and forth between machines as I try different OS's, and
> I always see thi
For about a year I have noticed that whenever my Windows boxes talk to my
Unix boxes, they communicate at about 1/10 normal speed. I copy lots (300GB)
of large files back and forth between machines as I try different OS's, and
I always see this.
Specifically, if I copy from FreeBSD to FreeBSD, fil
13 matches
Mail list logo
