On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Ed Avis wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Kai [iso-8859-1] Großjohann wrote:
>
>>>Providing an inline fsh method would not make sense because fsh is
>>>not interactive; it just sets up a tunnel that can be used for
>>>successive non-interactive commands.
>
>>Does this mean if you do "fsh -l USER HOST", then you don't get a
>>shell prompt from the remote host? Tramp expects a shell prompt in
>>this case.
>
> You do
>
> % fsh somehost do-this...
> % fsh somehost do-that...
> % fsh somehost do-the-other...
>
> The second and third commands reuse the existing ssh connection,
> there is no need to set it up and tear it down each time.
I know that this is _possible_ with fsh. But Tramp needs a shell
prompt to talk to.
In particular, Tramp does "cd /some/dir", followed by "ls -la". It
seems that this would be somewhat difficult to achieve if you prefix
every command with "fsh"?
> Also
>
> % fcp somefile somehost:
> % fcp anotherfile somehost:
>
> reuses the connection in a similar way.
Right.
> I thought that the out-of-band scp and rcp methods would just run
> scp or rcp to transfer files back and forth, so it would be easy to
> adapt them to fsh. Does tramp also require an actual prompt on the
> remote machine, even when files are transferred with scp?
Yes, even then, Tramp requires an actual prompt. It wants to do
filename completion and dired and stuff. (Also, Tramp supports remote
RCS and sends "ci" and "co" commands to the remote end.)
kai
--
~/.signature: No such file or directory
