>>>> On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 13:51:18 -0500 (EST),
>>>> nelson(a)media.mit.edu (Nelson Minar) said:
As for bad points of URLs.. for #1, emacs should be smarter about
If the string looks like a URL, don't do the special stripping that
emacs does. For #2, I think supporting the EFS syntax as a special
case would take care of it. For #3, I'm not so sure - it has to be
handled on a case by case basis for each protocol. ftp is easy,
rcp/scp/ssh is easy, I'm not so sure about http.
One last little bit - someone will need to define a URL syntax for
methods that don't currently have URLs. ssh, for instance. That should
be done in coordination with the people who develop those tools.
As I've mentioned before, there is another and much tougher issue than
simply using URLs to specify file names. EFS cannot use a file
transfer program that does not follow a protocol. EFS works with ftpd
by parsing the 3-digit return codes, which are defined in RFC 959.
Neither of rcp, scp, or ssh (or even sftp) provide status information
back, nor do they follow any defined protocol. They are designed as
user-level programs. EFS will not work with them now, nor will it
ever work with them.
To my knowledge, the only file transfer program that does give
well-defined status codes is ftp. Or more precisely, I should say
that the only programs are the various and many ftpd's which implement
the FT Protocol.
Therefore, the main reason for supporting URLs is not to allow people
to use rcp, scp, etc, but to provide the convenience of having EFS
support a widespread syntax. Support for URLs will not lead to
support for rcp, scp, etc.
A separate issue is support for secure file transfer with EFS. For
this there appear to be two options: ftpsshd and SSLftp. However,
these are both implementations of FTP and I believe that with some
minor setup of config variables, EFS will work with them now. We do
not need URLs for this.
To summarise, there are 3 issues swirling around here:
1. URL support. This is a user interface issue. Some work will need
to be done to make it compatible with Emacs, but this is a
possibility (maybe even a likelhood).
2. Support for rcp, scp and sftp. This is a non-starter.
3. Support for secure file transfers. Via ftpsshd and SSLftp we have
support for this now. However, we can probably do some things to
make it easier to set up EFS to use them.