Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server

[Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com>]

On 8/9/05, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:

> Sounds very good.  To the host, port, and auth, I'd add a "server
> name" entry, which would default to "server", to reproduce the
> socket-name thingy.

OK.

> > In emacsclient.c I've got rid of all AF_UNIX stuff.

> Doesn't sound so good.  I'd rather make it possible to choose between Unix
> and TCP sockets (default to Unix when possible, and TCP otherwise).

Oh. Well, the AF_UNIX code should be conditionally commented out on
Windows, or do you mean to choose at run-time?

> I'd rather see "server-name" which could be a path to a unix socket (like
> now) or just a relative name of a unix socket (like now) or the name of
> a server to be found in ~/.emacs.servers.  I.e. if there is no unix socket
> of that name, lookup ~/.emacs.servers for TCP servers.

I'm not sure I'm getting what you intend with this. Why would you do
have several servers on the same .emacs.server(s) file?

  - To run several instances of Emacs, each one a server, using the
same .emacs.server? I think that would cause all kinds of race
conditions; it'd be better to simply use different server files.

  - Or, for one single Emacs to have several server instances? I don't
think anything is gained there, in particular if you're going to have
the .emacs.server readable for clients (meaning that if they can read
the file, they can read all authorizations). OTOH, having different
servers *with different server files* could be useful.

> > The last change has been to make it consider \path and c:path as absolute
> > paths (previously it would prepend the current directory to Windows-style
> > absolute paths).
> 
> Of course this should only be done under w32.

Why? As I see it, the name you send is interpreted by the server, so
the client has to be able to send absolute and relative paths for all
environments (in fact, VMS or Mac ones should also be grokked, if
emacsclient works on these environments). I mean, if I'm on a
GNU/Linux, and the server is running on a Windows machine, emacsclient
c:\my\file.txt is likely to be a file on the server...

> > environments it'd be posible to use emacsclient/server.el with a fixed
> > address/port and no .emacs.server file (emacsclient would have to grow
> > --server-address and --server-port options, of course).
> 
> What would be the benefit?

On low-security setups (like the ones I'm gonna find myself 99% of the
time) I could just define an alias toem=`emacsclient --auth=myauth
--host=myhost --port=myport' and not worry about setting reading
permissions on the server's %HOME% dir.

-- 
                    /L/e/k/t/u