Re: [bug #18042] cannot specify port number in shell link

[Leonard den Ottolander <leonard den ottolander nl>]

Hello Andrew,

On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 12:04 +0000, Andrew V. Samoilov wrote:
> Follow-up Comment #3, bug #18042 (project mc):
> 
> > Do I understand correctly that a port number *can* be combined with C _or_
> r?

> No. Look at utilvfs.c:vfs_split_url().
> No one syntax change. Only undocumented behaviour changed.
> It is possible to use /#sh:user host:6789 right now.

Maybe we should introduce a syntax change, because at least the
combination of a port number and C are very welcome.

What about a solution whereby the user can add any of these options, in
any particular order, all separated by colons? Would that be a lot of
work to implement?

> And fish uses port&1 as 'C' option and port&2 as 'r'.
> 
> Possible solution is to use 0x10000<<1 and 0x10000<<2 instead of 1 and 2.

That would probably get rid of the need for an extra parameter to
separate the port number from other options.

> I am not sure we can allow such redesign because of lack of manpower.

Do I understand correctly that you are not willing to implement such a
change? Can we at least agree on a new syntax if somebody (I?) would be
willing to implement it?

Leonard.

-- 
mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research