Re: testing for a remote file to include file on a Windows mapped drive

[Stefan Monnier]

>> > Could someone please summarize what was done about this?
>> Nothing.

> Could you (someone) explain why nothing was done? Was it because it
> was decided that: It was a silly problem and request (no need)? No
> idea how to fix it? No resources to fix it? Someone is still working
> on it?

AFAIK, it's a difficult problem, and it's not very high up on the
priority.

> Assuming for the moment that there is no intention to do anything
> about it, can someone at least weigh in on the code I sent (which I'm
> still using)?  Suggestions for improvement?

> What about the question wrt `file-remote-p' and `ffap-remote-p'?

ffap-file-remote-p seems to be incompatible with file-remote-p because
it is also used to "normalize" file names and is applied to URLs even
when url-handler-mode is not loaded.

Maybe we should add to file-remote-p something equivalent to
ffap-rfs-regexp.


        Stefan