Thanks for the pointer. I was stucked in git on Solaris.
Probably I don't understand the usage of gvfs.

# gvfs-mount -m smb://foo
Error mounting location: DBus error org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.NoReply: Did not 
receive a reply. Possible causes include: the remote application did not send a 
reply, the message bus security policy blocked the reply, the reply timeout 
expired, or the network connection was broken.
# gvfs-mount smb://foo /mnt
Error mounting location: volume doesn't implement unmount
^C
# gvfs-mount smb://foo/data /mnt
Error mounting location: volume doesn't implement unmount
^C

I'ld like to know if I can disable to use DBus.

I agree with most of your mentions. My point is that I want to fix this problem 
asap in GNOME SVN HEAD.

 > doesn't solve the issues fully, and that is very undiscoverable and as
 > such won't be used by many. Its also smb-specific and locale-encoding

I think the support of legacy encodings is still important for users. Many 
users want the seamless migration from Windows filenames to UNIX legacy 
filenames.


Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 20:30 +0900, Takao Fujiwara - Tokyo S/W Center
> wrote:
> 
>>OK, it may be a better solution however may I ask some questions.
>>
>>1. Can I access the source codes of gvfs? When do you think the release date?
> 
> 
> Work in progress availible with git at:
> http://www.gnome.org/~alexl/git/gvfs.git
> 
> 
>>2. Why do you think different encodings are needed per smb shares?
>>It seems the complicated usage for me because users hardly know which
>>encoding is used currently. Normally sysadmins try to mount all smb
>>dirs with same iocharset for general users and my understanding is
>>that "mount" needs a privilege, i.e. general users cannot mount/umount
>>smb dirs by themselves without privileges so I cannot imagine the
>>necessity. My guess is that if nautilus could be launched
>>on different encodings between gnome-panel workspaces, it would be an
>>option?
> 
> 
> I'm not saying everyone needs to use per-encodings, but a solution that
> doesn't allow it then there are cases when you need it is not really
> nice. When you're in a well run sysadmined network the sysadmin can make
> sure things are ok. Things are different when you're just casually
> browsing a (maybe foreign) network with gnome-vfs and click on some
> share.
> 
> Encodings per workspace? What sort of bizzare connection is that? Not
> that its even remotely implementable.
> 
> 
>>3. Even though gvfs will have the "mount" knowlege, It seems my patch
>>doesn't conflict with the feature because users just can unset the
>>env. What do you think?
> 
> 
> Its not really about conflicts, its about your patch being a hack that
> doesn't solve the issues fully, and that is very undiscoverable and as
> such won't be used by many. Its also smb-specific and locale-encoding
> specific and not general in any way.
> 
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>  Alexander Larsson                                            Red Hat, Inc 
>                    [EMAIL PROTECTED]    [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> He's an otherworldly moralistic dwarf moving from town to town, helping folk 
> in trouble. She's a disco-crazy communist pearl diver looking for love in all 
> the wrong places. They fight crime! 
> 


-- 
nautilus-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list

Reply via email to