Re: rssh.el interactions with ange-ftp/efs
- First Post
- Replies
- Stats
-
Go to
- ----- 2022 -----
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2021 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2020 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2019 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2018 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2017 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2016 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2015 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2014 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2013 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2012 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2011 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2010 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2009 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2008 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2007 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2006 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2005 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2004 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2003 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2002 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2001 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2000 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1999 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1998 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> writes:
>>>>> "Kai" == Kai Grossjohann
<Kai.Grossjohann(a)CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE> writes:
Kai> Why do we have to use URL syntax if it is inconvenient?
Kai> Wouldn't "/ftp:user＠host:/path/to/file" work, too?
Specifically, it doesn't generalize very well to relative URLs with
non-default port numbers.
There is no such thing as a relative URL with a non-default port
number. Please note that all URLs starting with "http:" are absolute
even though Netscape accepts strange ones like "http:file" meaning the
same thing as "file". (The RFCs I read a year or so ago required
"http:" to be followed by "//".)
But I agree that port numbers should be allowed.
Btw, I'd say that one uses "/nihp:user＠host:/path/to/file" for the Not
Invented Here Protocol.
kai
--
Abort this operation? [Abort] [Cancel]
Wednesday, 27 January
Wed, 27 Jan
10:42 a.m.
New subject: rssh.el interactions with ange-ftp/efs
>>>> "Kai" == Kai Grossjohann
<Kai.Grossjohann(a)CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE> writes:
Kai> "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> writes:
> Specifically, it doesn't generalize very well to relative
URLs
> with non-default port numbers.
Kai> There is no such thing as a relative URL with a non-default
Kai> port
My bad. That should have been "\"relative\"", not
"relative". I
meant the EFS notion of "relative to login $HOME".
Kai> Btw, I'd say that one uses "/nihp:user＠host:/path/to/file"
Kai> for the Not Invented Here Protocol.
I can't say not. :-) But I already admitted that EFS may be a good
UI for this.
--
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
What are those two straight lines for? "Free software rules."
Sandy Rutherford
Wednesday, 3 February
Wed, 3 Feb
3:38 a.m.
New subject: rssh.el interactions with ange-ftp/efs
>>>> On 27 Jan 1999 11:27:53 +0100,
>>>> Kai.Grossjohann(a)CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE said:
There is no such thing as a relative URL with a non-default port
number. Please note that all URLs starting with "http:" are absolute
even though Netscape accepts strange ones like "http:file" meaning the
same thing as "file". (The RFCs I read a year or so ago required
"http:" to be followed by "//".)
But I agree that port numbers should be allowed.
BTW, the EFS syntax already does support port numbers. To FTP to a
nonstandard port, the syntax is
/user＠host#port:/file/name
That syntax has been supported since about '93 if my memory serves. I
would have to wade through my old change logs to know exactly when I
put that in.
--sandy
8638
days inactive
8645
days old
2 comments
3 participants
tags (0)
participants (3)
-
Kai Großjohann -
Sandy Rutherford -
Stephen J. Turnbull