ftp client in C

[asit]

I need some help about FTP.

is there any library available to design FTP client functionality in
C ???

i searched in google. Thousands of links suggested me to use cURL..but
its not compartible with Borland c++.

I have already asked it in win32 community. But becoz of medium
activity in that community and this question is a bit relevant to C
language, I decided to ask it here.

 

[Antoninus Twink]

is there any library available to design FTP client functionality in
C ???

i searched in google. Thousands of links suggested me to use cURL..but
its not compartible with Borland c++.

What makes you think that?

libcurl is a cross-platform C library; just #include its header file,
and if you're writing in C++ then all the functions will be correctly
specified in extern "C" sections so that you can use them with no
problems.

 

[Keith Thompson]

I need some help about FTP.

is there any library available to design FTP client functionality in
C ???

i searched in google. Thousands of links suggested me to use cURL..but
its not compartible with Borland c++.

I have already asked it in win32 community. But becoz of medium
activity in that community and this question is a bit relevant to C
language, I decided to ask it here.

Wrong again.

This newsgroup discusses the C programming language, as defined by the
ISO C Standard(s) and by older documents such as K&R (Kernighan and
Ritchie, "The C Programming Language", 1st and 2nd editions).

Standard C has no built-in support for networking, either in the core
language or in the standard library. That means that any networking
support must be provided by additional libraries, provided by a
particular C implementation, by the operating system, or by some third
party.

(A few trolls will insist that these things are appropriate for this
newsgroup. Please ignore them.)

You say you're using Borland C++. I assume you're using it in a mode
in which it acts as a C compiler. (If not, you're programming in C++,
not C, and you're definitely in the wrong newsgroup.)

Why do you assume that cURL is not compatible with Borland C++? Grab
the source distribution and take a look at docs/INSTALL, searching for
"Borland". If you run into problems, consult an appropriate mailing
list at <http://curl.haxx.se/>.

 

[asit]

What makes you think that?

libcurl is a cross-platform C library; just #include its header file,
and if you're writing in C++ then all the functions will be correctly
specified in extern "C" sections so that you can use them with no
problems.

I modified a little header file
like
"curlver.h" to <curl\curl.h>
but it gives a lot of linking error..

 

[Antoninus Twink]

I modified a little header file
like
"curlver.h" to <curl\curl.h>
but it gives a lot of linking error..

What do the linking errors say? There will be plenty of people here who
are familiar with Borland products who'll be able to interpret them.

Are you sure you've told your linker to link against libcurl? If you
invoke the linker on the command line, you probably need to pass an
argument like -lcurl. Otherwise, there may be some "linker properties"
or similar menu option where you can list the libraries your program
needs.

 

[Richard Nixon]

Wrong again.

This newsgroup discusses the C programming language, as defined by the
ISO C Standard(s) and by older documents such as K&R (Kernighan and
Ritchie, "The C Programming Language", 1st and 2nd editions).

Standard C has no built-in support for networking, either in the core
language or in the standard library. That means that any networking
support must be provided by additional libraries, provided by a
particular C implementation, by the operating system, or by some third
party.

(A few trolls will insist that these things are appropriate for this
newsgroup. Please ignore them.)

You say you're using Borland C++. I assume you're using it in a mode
in which it acts as a C compiler. (If not, you're programming in C++,
not C, and you're definitely in the wrong newsgroup.)

Why do you assume that cURL is not compatible with Borland C++? Grab
the source distribution and take a look at docs/INSTALL, searching for
"Borland". If you run into problems, consult an appropriate mailing
list at <http://curl.haxx.se/>.

There's all that, but I would think C is a clumsy tool for something like
this compared to alternatives.

This stuff is *easy* in Perl and ruby.

A background in C helps for Perl, as under the hood is C. Ruby's written
with MVC++ 6.
--
Richard Milhous Nixon

All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and then success is
sure.
~~ Mark Twain

 

[CBFalconer]

I need some help about FTP.

is there any library available to design FTP client functionality
in C ???

i searched in google. Thousands of links suggested me to use cURL.
but its not compartible with Borland c++.

I have already asked it in win32 community. But becoz of medium
activity in that community and this question is a bit relevant to
C language, I decided to ask it here.

No, it is not on topic in c.l.c. Get a copy of the C standard and
read it (C99 below). That is what controls what is topical here.
And stop posting off-topic questions.

Some useful references about C:
<http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>
<http://c-faq.com/> (C-faq)
<http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc/off-topic.html>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf> (C99)
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net/download/n869_txt.bz2> (pre-C99)
<http://www.dinkumware.com/c99.aspx> (C-library}
<http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/> (GNU docs)
<http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/C_community:comp.lang.c:Introduction>

 

[Keith Thompson]

I need some help about FTP.

[...]
No, it is not on topic in c.l.c.

[...]

As I told him more than 5 hours ago.

And it's not a news server latency problem; we both post through
motzarella.org.

 

[CBFalconer]

I need some help about FTP.

[...]
No, it is not on topic in c.l.c.

[...]

As I told him more than 5 hours ago. And it's not a news server
latency problem; we both post through motzarella.org.

So what? My newsreader is set to sort thread contents in posting
order. I prefer to read older posts first - it is something like
top-posting versus bottom-posting, and makes more sense.

 

[jameskuyper]

Keith Thompson wrote: ....

So what? My newsreader is set to sort thread contents in posting
order. I prefer to read older posts first - it is something like
top-posting versus bottom-posting, and makes more sense.

So does mine. However, while I might compose my answer to someone's
message as soon as I've read it, I hold off on posting it until after
I've made sure that no one else has already posted a equivalent
response. This also gives me time to reconsider my response in light
of how other people responded. It's not unusual for me to discover
that someone else's response caught some aspect of the problem that I
hadn't noticed, or misunderstood. I would strongly recommend that you
adopt a similar policy.

 

[Keith Thompson]

asit wrote:

I need some help about FTP. [...]
No, it is not on topic in c.l.c.

[...]

As I told him more than 5 hours ago. And it's not a news server
latency problem; we both post through motzarella.org.

So what? My newsreader is set to sort thread contents in posting
order. I prefer to read older posts first - it is something like
top-posting versus bottom-posting, and makes more sense.

Yes, my newsreader does the same thing.

My point is that your habit of posting followups without bothering to
read later followups is causing you to waste everybody's time by
writing things that have already been said. (And yes, I probably do
that myself sometimes.) Read in whatever order you like, but please
consider saving your followups until you've seen what everyone else
has already posted.

If you're reading an article posted several hours ago asking for help
with FTP, it's reasonalbe to assume that somebody else has already
posted a followup saying that it's off-topic, and likely redirecting
the OP to another forum where he can actually get useful information.

 

[Antoninus Twink]

If you're reading an article posted several hours ago asking for help
with FTP, it's reasonalbe to assume that somebody else has already
posted a followup saying that it's off-topic

In such an event, it's reasonable to assume that there's been a feeding
frenzy where many other people have posted caustic followups making the
false assertion that it's off-topic.

It's also possible that one or two voices of sanity have actually posted
a helpful answer to the question, instead of telling the OP to get lost.

 

[Default User]

Yes, my newsreader does the same thing.

My point is that your habit of posting followups without bothering to
read later followups is causing you to waste everybody's time by
writing things that have already been said. (And yes, I probably do
that myself sometimes.) Read in whatever order you like, but please
consider saving your followups until you've seen what everyone else
has already posted.

If you're reading an article posted several hours ago asking for help
with FTP, it's reasonalbe to assume that somebody else has already
posted a followup saying that it's off-topic, and likely redirecting
the OP to another forum where he can actually get useful information.

It's gotten to the point where a lot of times I refresh the group to
make sure somebody hasn't already posted with a similar answer. Very
often, that is the case.



Brian