Re: VFS for legacy apps (was: gvfs status report)

On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 12:49 -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 12:38 +0000, Damon Chaplin wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 03:10 -0600, Hans Petter Jansson wrote:
> > > However, the first method you describe:
> > > 
> > > ~/.mounts/type=smb-share;server=$server;share=$share/dir/file.txt
> > > 
> > > sounds perfect. It's rich (we can get back the mount info later),
> > > extensible (we don't have to figure out the entire set of potential
> > > mount options in advance) and fairly simple (the root nodes are all
> > > direct children of ~/.mounts).
> > You're probably always going to need type, server and share though, so
> > maybe you can make it a bit more readable:
> > 
> >   ~/.mounts/smb:$server:$share/dir/file.txt
> > 
> > Extra options can go on the end.
> > 
> > Also I'd probably avoid ';' just in case bash goes anywhere near it.
> Yeah - the actual syntax is still up in the air, but we need to define
> it carefully. Do you think ':' is a good separator?
> I'm not sure you'll always be accessing a share (subdirectory) on the
> server. I guess we could make the share be "/" in that case...

In the current code browsing a share and browsing a server/workgroup is
two different types, smb-share and smb-server. This is required to map
correctly on the weird thing that is smb uris. So, this is not really a
problem in this particular case.

The problem of multiple optional options is still in the generic case

 Alexander Larsson                                            Red Hat, Inc 
                   alexl redhat com    alla lysator liu se 
He's a deeply religious Jewish paranormal investigator who must take 
medication to keep him sane. She's a ditzy tempestuous wrestler descended from 
a line of powerful witches. They fight crime! 

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]