[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification |
Date: |
12 Jul 2002 09:48:20 +0900 |
address@hidden (Kai Großjohann) writes:
> I think I've now done it so that it works. The new filename format
> is this:
>
> Normal:
> /method:address@hidden:/path/to/file
> Multi-hop:
> /multi:hopm1:address@hidden:hopm2:address@hidden:/path/to/file
Using `:' for both separators makes filenames with omitted components
more ambiguous. I thought there was pretty much a consensus to use `#'
to delineate the method (either as a post- or prefix); why did you
change it? [More importantly, why did you change it unilaterally?]
> In the multi-hop format, all methods must be given, both the initial
> "multi" or "multiu" which decides between base64 and uuencode, and
> the hop methods hopm1, ..., hopmK.
Why?
-Miles
--
Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over,
pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come. --Nietzsche
- Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification, Kai Großjohann, 2002/07/11
- Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification,
Miles Bader <=
- Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification, Kai Großjohann, 2002/07/12
- Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification, Kim F. Storm, 2002/07/12
- Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification, Kai Großjohann, 2002/07/12
- Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification, Juanma Barranquero, 2002/07/12
- Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification, Kim F. Storm, 2002/07/12
- Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification, Juanma Barranquero, 2002/07/12
- Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification, Kim F. Storm, 2002/07/12
- Re: Tramp/Ange-FTP filename unification, Juanma Barranquero, 2002/07/12