fact equal to a blank one according to the spec.

even after EPSV returned a positive response code, if libcurl failed to
connect to the port number the EPSV response said. Obviously some people are
going through protocol-sensitive firewalls (or similar) that don't understand
EPSV and then they don't allow the second connection unless PASV was
used. This also called for a minor fix of test case 238.

Tried to make some of the wording a bit more consistent.

(CURLOPT_FTPPORT) didn't work for ipv6-enabed curls if the IP wasn't a
"native" IP while it works fine for ipv6-disabled builds!

In the process of fixing this, I removed the support for LPRT since I can't
think of many reasons to keep doing it and asking on the mailing list didn't
reveal anyone else that could either. The code that sends EPRT and PORT is
now also a lot simpler than before (IMHO).

didn't work.

the latest features and protocols that libcurl supports and has a minor fix to
better deal with the obscure case where someone has more than one libcurl
installed at the same time.

not supporting it. It hasn't been functioning for years anyway, so this is
just finally stating what already was true. And a cleanup at the same time.

into a counter, and thus you can now do multiple curl_global_init() and you
are then supposed to do the same amount of calls to curl_global_cleanup().
Bryan also updated the docs accordingly.

test script to kill all processes in the current process group!

HTTP proxy.

in 7.15.1

given subdirs, libcurl would still "remember" the full path as if it is the
current directory libcurl is in so that the next curl_easy_perform() would
get really confused if it tried the same path again - as it would not issue
any CWD commands at all, assuming it is already in the "proper" dir.

Starting now, a failed CWD command sets a flag that prevents the path to be
"remembered" after returning.

actually used a new connection and not sent the second request on the first
socket!

is present instead of trying to duplicate that stuff in this script.

newer gcc versions that no longer defines "riscos".

mistaking it for an actual failed test case