 |
 |
Hi Patrick, Our initial thought was to keep the xrdcp regardless of what client library is used. We can do that because the syntax is identical to both versions. That can't be said for xrd and xrdfs which have very different syntax. So, we would keep xrd as long as we support the old client library (at least 2 more years after the official new client release). I think it would be a rude shock if we renamed xrdfs to xrd. Andy -----Original Message----- From: Patrick McGuigan Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 3:29 PM To: xrootd-l Subject: Longer term plans for xrd, xrdcp Hi, I take it that the xrdfs and xrdcopy commands are implementations of xrd and xrdcp using the new client library. I need to write wrappers for these types of commands (also xrdadler32) and I am wondering if xrd and xrdcp will continue to exist in later releases, or if the new client library becomes the standard that xrdfs and xrdcopy will be renamed to xrd and xrdcp (respectively), or if both are expected to exist going forward? Also is there is any documentation on xrd/xrdfs beyond the man page or command help? Regards, Patrick ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-L&A=1 ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-L&A=1