On 27 February 2013 08:24, <mycrof...@sphericalharmony.com> wrote: > I hope this post leads to constructive discussion of the import/exportfs > protocol.
As you'll have noticed, it isn't a great protocol as it stands. I don't think your option makes it worse. Thanks for the detailed discussion. I think at least one existing system already does what you say, using the -m option ([just] mount, skipping the tree spec), and if you were to use that in a patch to sources, then eventually that private change could be eliminated. Note that in your example import -z tcp!server!9876 somefiles /n/authedimport with the existing import you don't need to specify the (now unused) somefiles. If I write {import system /net} it sends "/net" as the tree by default. I think all you'd need to do to make the option tidier is to reject the case argc == 3 in the relevant switch if the option is set. Then you could write (changing the option letter): import -m tcp!server!9876 /n/authedimport which reads as import by mounting the 9P service on the given connection on the given mount point. It's otherwise a little strange to have an argument (your "somefiles") that's completely ignored. As you say, this could also reasonably be an option to srv to authenticate its connection to a remote exportfs, but the fewer commands that know this particular protocol, the better, and both import and exportfs already do that.