From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Robert J. Chassell" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Integrate Tramp Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 15:20:52 +0000 (UTC) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200206171631.g5HGVBM13861@aztec.santafe.edu> <200206190223.g5J2NlQ15963@aztec.santafe.edu> <5x8z5bqvxc.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1024500252 17478 127.0.0.1 (19 Jun 2002 15:24:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 15:24:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17KhJc-0004Xn-00 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 17:24:12 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17Khkr-0001vt-00 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 17:52:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17KhJY-0005pp-00; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 11:24:08 -0400 Original-Received: from megalith.rattlesnake.com ([140.186.114.245] helo=localhost) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17KhGZ-0005gq-00; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 11:21:03 -0400 Original-Received: by rattlesnake.com via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.114) Wed, 19 Jun 2002 15:20:52 +0000 (UTC) Original-To: storm@cua.dk In-Reply-To: <5x8z5bqvxc.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> (storm@cua.dk) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:4993 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4993 Actually, the full tramp format seems to be /[method/user@host]/path/to/file I think using / to separate the method is a really bad idea, ... Don't forget multi-hops! Sometimes the full tramp format uses a colon instead of / to separate the method. Info File: tramp, Node: Multi-hop filename syntax gives this example: /[multi/rsh:out@gate/telnet:kai@real.host]/path/to.file You go on to suggest: If we adapt the idea of using the same notation as ange-ftp, i.e. /user@host:/path/to/file you could add the method as /[method]user@host:/ if you really need to specify the method (using a list of host,method mapping and auto-detection would be much better). Yes. This is better. How about the following for the entirely-manual multi-hop syntax? /[multi]/[rsh]out@gate.com/[telnet]kai@real.host:/path/to.file Although I not not like putting a / between [multi] and [rsh] , I am even more against these two alternatives: /[multi:rsh]out@... which suggests to me that the `multi' arg applies only to the first hop /[multi][rsh]out@... which looks ugly and also makes the `multi' arg appear to apply only to the first hop. The semi-autodedected form could be; /[multi]/out@gate/[telnet]kai@real.host:/path/to.file (I am against a /multi/ form since I can easily imagine a file name of that sort on my local machine.) The fully autodedected form should be: /out@gate.com/kai@real.host:/path/to.file -- Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com