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

[Eli Zaretskii]

> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
>       FORGED_RCVD_HELO,SPF_SOFTFAIL,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no 
>       version=3.1.0
> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:39:50 -0400
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden,
>       address@hidden
> 
> >> I just have noticed several different concerns that tend to be
> >> conflated:
> >> - reliability and performance.
> >> - ability to access the file via syscalls.
> >> - whether relative file names can be used from one file name to another.
> >> - whether a file's contents is directly accessible via syscalls.
> 
> > I think Drew had yet another concern, which is uncovered by the above.
> 
> Which one?

The case with remote volumes mounted via the OS facilities such as
NFS.  They are almost identical in reliability and performance to
local volumes, and cannot be distinguished using file-remote-p, but
Drew insisted on being able to distinguish them anyway.