On 16 Oct 1999, Kai Gro�johann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Jeffrey Juliano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> (setq f "/r@scp:juliano@capefear:.emacs")
>> "/r@scp:juliano@capefear:.emacs"
>>
>> (file-name-directory f) ; why is "scp:" both here
>> "/r@scp:"
>>
>> (file-name-nondirectory f) ; and here?
>> "r@scp:juliano@capefear:.emacs"
>
> Daniel has some good suggestions, but I'm not sure I want to do _that_
> many workarounds.
I agree with you here - it's nasty to need to do this in lisp. The right
thing(tm) to do is to get both Emacs and XEmacs to grok the rcp syntax
in the C engine.
[...]
> If that works with NT Emacs, too, then I think it is reasonable to
> require the users to explicitly specify the remote directory.
I would rather see rcp behave more like efs, even if that requires some
(hopefully) temporary workarounds like the 'file-name-directory' stuff.
Of course, it's your baby here - I am just a user :)
Daniel
--
Life is a process of becoming, a combination of states we have to go
through. Where people fail is that they wish to elect a state and remain in
it. This is a kind of death.
-- Anais Nin
