Alexander Larsson wrote: > I just glanced over your mail, and I saw this. I'm not sure this is a > reasonable goal at all. A very common situation is that you have a share > that allows anonymous read-only access, but if you actually log in > correctly you can write too. With the strategy you describe above you > would never get prompted for a username in this case, and thus you would > never be able to log in to get write access to the share. > > Also, things get complicated with browsing. For instance, I think its > possible for a non-anonymous share enumeration to return more results > than an anonymous one. This is common with e.g. homedirs on smb, but > could also happen if you want to hide shares from guest users. In this > case if we always fall back to anonymous enumeration if possible we > would never show such shares.
We support this by putting the user name in the URI, that is: via the 'Connect to Server' box. Cheers, Nate _______________________________________________ gnome-vfs-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-vfs-list
