Hey, On Fri, 2005-05-20 at 16:00 -0400, Michael R Head wrote: > I always thought that one of the cool things about gnome-vfs was that > you could simply pass a (chained) URI to a file in an archive, and the > application would then be able to use it directly. If the gnome-vfs > backend allowed writing back, then the file would be writable, > otherwise, it would be read-only.
Yeah, and the problem here is that you're also inventing your own URI scheme. Not that there is one for this sort of thing, I don't think. But you'd want to get buy in from KDE. I'd love to see a unified VFS mechanism... it'd make things a lot easier for us. :) > But it seems that sort of thing never took off, and it still wouldn't > solve the mbox problem, unless an mbox gnome-vfs chaining backend were > written... Yeah, and I think we can all agree that's not a good idea. :) Joe _______________________________________________ Dashboard-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/dashboard-hackers
