On 15 Mar 2001, Daniel Pittman wrote:
True. I intend to take this up with the maintainers of it,
eventually. It's also true, though, of Ange-FTP.
To my knowledge, Ange-FTP isn't so pushy. For Ange-FTP, it's
sufficient to add it to file-name-handler-alist, and then to deal with
the functions
On 15 Mar 2001, Kai Grojohann wrote:
On 15 Mar 2001, Daniel Pittman wrote:
True. I intend to take this up with the maintainers of it,
eventually. It's also true, though, of Ange-FTP.
To my knowledge, Ange-FTP isn't so pushy. For Ange-FTP, it's
sufficient to add it to
On 15 Mar 2001, Daniel Pittman wrote:
Anyway, I will look at that as a solution to the hook ordering
thing, unless someone felt like doing it for me. :)
Well, your current filename suggestion means there is no clash. Which
is good.
In case there is a filename syntax with clash, we can start
On 15 Mar 2001, Kai Grojohann wrote:
On 15 Mar 2001, Daniel Pittman wrote:
Anyway, I will look at that as a solution to the hook ordering
thing, unless someone felt like doing it for me. :)
Well, your current filename suggestion means there is no clash. Which
is good.
In case there
Yes. Despite `file-remote-p'[1] being available, many packages are
hard-coded to the knowledge of FTP-style paths.
VC did (in Emacs-20) and ediff still does.
Which others ?
Yes. Especially because, for example, VC will refuse to operate on a FTP
file path (because it can't), while TRAMP
"Daniel" == Daniel Pittman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't C-u [1] C-x C-f what you want there, or is that just XEmacs?
I think it's an Emacsism (but I wouldn't know).
It prompts me interactively for a coding system to visit with...
Is that the coding system used for the file's content ?
I
On 15 Mar 2001, Stefan Monnier wrote:
"Daniel" == Daniel Pittman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't C-u [1] C-x C-f what you want there, or is that just XEmacs?
I think it's an Emacsism (but I wouldn't know).
In Emacs, prefix arg for C-x C-f deals with wildcards, not with coding
systems.
kai
On 15 Mar 2001, Stefan Monnier wrote:
"Daniel" == Daniel Pittman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't C-u [1] C-x C-f what you want there, or is that just XEmacs?
I think it's an Emacsism (but I wouldn't know).
It prompts me interactively for a coding system to visit with...
Is that the
Well, I tried to write a message for the Emacs developers and pretesters
lists, but could not manage to write anything that would make sense. I
suspect that we (ar at least it's me) do not have ideas clear enough to
be explained outside of here.
In fact, I do not manage to make a resume of
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Pete Forman wrote:
Daniel Pittman writes:
As such, I want to propose an alternate tag to indicate our own
paths:
"/!/"
[...]
I agree with you but would like to take it further. How about
reworking the whole syntax along these lines.
On 13 Mar 2001, Stefan Monnier wrote:
"Pete" == Pete Forman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
/![@enc]/:telnet://[usr[:pwd]@]host1[:port]/ssh://host2/:/path/to/file
[...]
F tramp-prefix-authority"//:" or "#"
Clearly ""//:"" won't do since Emacs tends to interpret it directly. I
liked the
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Francesco Potorti` wrote:
As such, I want to propose an alternate tag to indicate our own
paths:
"/!/"
Seconded.
I still do not like it at all. It's completely different from anything
that is done out there. There is a quasi-standard for
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Edward J. Sabol wrote:
I agree with Francesco. I don't like "/!/" at all.
The prefix will be changeable, using custom, with no trouble at all.
First off, I have to use the shift key to type the exclamation point.
So, pick something different. "/tramp/" is available.
On 13 Mar 2001, Stefan Monnier wrote:
"Francesco" == Francesco Potorti` [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Emacs should have a general hook for /[^/]+:.* filenames, where [^/]+
is the protocol. Then, different packages could register to that hook
and tell it which protocol they do manage.
I think
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Francesco Potorti` wrote:
Well, I tried to write a message for the Emacs developers and
pretesters lists, but could not manage to write anything that would
make sense.
I am happy to offer what help I can. I would like to see a good solution
to the issue forged.
I
On 15-Mar-2001, Daniel Pittman wrote:
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Edward J. Sabol wrote:
I agree with Francesco. I don't like "/!/" at all.
The prefix will be changeable, using custom, with no trouble at all.
Yes, that's always been the case, but I strongly feel that the default should
be wisely
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Edward J. Sabol wrote:
On 15-Mar-2001, Daniel Pittman wrote:
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Edward J. Sabol wrote:
I agree with Francesco. I don't like "/!/" at all.
The prefix will be changeable, using custom, with no trouble at all.
Yes, that's always been the case, but I
On 14 Mar 2001, Kai Grojohann wrote:
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Edward J. Sabol wrote:
On 15-Mar-2001, Daniel Pittman wrote:
[...]
It's hard to support, requires hacking the innards of other
packages and introduces load-order dependencies in the packages.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's
On 13 Mar 2001, Daniel Pittman wrote:
As such, I want to propose an alternate tag to indicate our own
paths:
"/!/"
Seconded. People might wish to change it to something that's easy to
type on their keyboard. On a German keyboard, I think "//" is easy
to type. ("/" is shift-7 and ""
As such, I want to propose an alternate tag to indicate our own
paths:
"/!/"
Seconded.
I still do not like it at all. It's completely different from anything
that is done out there. There is a quasi-standard for doing such
things, which involves using
Francesco Potorti` writes:
As such, I want to propose an alternate tag to indicate our
own paths:
"/!/"
Seconded.
I still do not like it at all. It's completely different from
anything that is done out there. There is a quasi-standard for
doing
"Francesco" == Francesco Potorti` [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Emacs should have a general hook for /[^/]+:.* filenames, where [^/]+ is
the protocol. Then, different packages could register to that hook and
tell it which protocol they do manage.
I think using /protocol: is just fine, indeed.
"Pete" == Pete Forman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
/![@enc]/:telnet://[usr[:pwd]@]host1[:port]/ssh://host2/:/path/to/file
[...]
F tramp-prefix-authority"//:" or "#"
Clearly ""//:"" won't do since Emacs tends to interpret it directly.
I liked the @enc thing, except that I'd use it for the
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Francesco Potorti` wrote:
In the long run, perhaps. But if we think that this is The Right
Thing, then we should make this discussion go public, and at least
hear from others.
I think RMS has said he wants it, if somebody can show him that it
works. Dunno of any other
24 matches
Mail list logo
