[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why proxies?
From: |
Kirk Strauser |
Subject: |
Re: Why proxies? |
Date: |
Wed, 30 Aug 2006 10:37:27 -0500 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.4 |
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 9:57 am, Michael Albinus wrote:
> It depends on how you use Tramp for multi-hops. If you have always the
> same paths to hop, proxies are better because they are much shorter to
> type once they are set up. And it is my impression that _this_ kind of
> use is the majority (but maybe I'm wrong).
That's fair enough, and I could see how they'd be more convenient for that
case. It just seems to strongly pessimize uncommon usages.
> But I see your point: applying multi-hop on the fly is worse
> now. Maybe we can make a compromise: there is a request for supporting
> new Tramp users entering remote file names step by step,
> interactively.
That could be useful.
Another alternative that would fix 99% of the problems I have would be to
find a way to allow the proxy value to incorporate parts of the host (and
maybe user) values. For example, I want to write a ruleset like:
(add-to-list 'tramp-default-proxies-alist
'(".my.domain" nil "/ssh:address@hidden:"))
(add-to-list 'tramp-default-proxies-alist
'(nil "kirk" nil))
so that "/sudo:address@hidden" will first ssh to randomhost,
then use sudo to change users. From what I can tell, I currently have to
write a rule for each and every machine before I can connect to it for the
first time. Would something like that be workable?
--
Kirk Strauser
The Day Companies