> 
> but the URL parsing should be changed to allow "file:///mnt/..."
unless
> there is
> never likely to be any confusion with "//mnt/..." entries I noticed in
an
> /etc/fstab...
> 
> > > (likewise for CD2 and CD3)
> > >
> > > "file:///mnt..." because the docs say "file://<path>" and <path>
is
> > > "/mnt/cd..."; hence "///".
> > >
> >
> > Wrong second time. Urpmi knows that path is absolute. Adding third
slash
> > result in extra double slashes which usually does not hurt, but ...
> 
> As a user, I should not have to know that urpmi assUmes an absolute
path;
> it
> should follow UR* conventions.
>

As a user you should know how to define it; as you user you most
probably do not even know what URL is. Show me where it is stated that
urpmi parameter conforms to any RFC. I find it silly to be forced to
type extra slash just to be conformant.

That's said I have nothing against accepting file:/// _in addition_ to
current syntax.

-andrej

Reply via email to