Stavros Giannouris wrote: >>In Windows, a "samba" share is like >>any other folder to the applications, because the support is >>implemented in the system-level. In other words, it doesn't matter to >>mplayer2.exe if I double-clicked on "C:\file.avi" or >>"\\share\file.avi". To the application, both paths point to a file. >> >>This kind of transparent network support is what I'm really asking >>for, but maybe it's not suitable in this Thunar-specific mailing list. >>Gnome seems (?) to have started to implement this, but it looks like >>they implemented it in the application-level (e.g. totem has support >>for smb://.. URIs while rhytmbox doesn't). >> >>I have all my media (music, movies, etc) stored on my server which I >>can access with samba or ssh. If I want to access these files, I need >>to use e.g. Totem instead of Xfce's media player since the latter has >>no support for network shares. > > If you have some samba shares that you need to have constant access to, > you can always create an fstab entry for them and mount them through > smbfs/cifs. Then all will be transparent. > The other solutions (like smb:// uris in gnome-vfs) are mere > workarounds to enable occasional & quick access for non-priviledged > users to those shares.
Exactly. And that's also the reason why I'm not sure that smb support should be provided by the file manager. Benedikt _______________________________________________ Thunar-dev mailing list [email protected] http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/thunar-dev
