On 16 Mar 2001, Kai Großjohann wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Tom Roche wrote:
>
>> and I know it works, but I don't understand why. However, _that_ is
>> not my immediate concern. Instead, I'd like to know: can TRAMP be
>> hacked to get a password itself, and pass it to the client via its
>> args (e.g. via tramp-telnet-args)? I.e. broken-client support ?-)
>
> Of course, it is possible to implement that. I'm afraid I won't have
> time, though. And also, Daniel's rewrite will make most of the
> changes I do mostly useless, I guess. So I'm reluctant to invest too
> much work into the old code.
>
> I guess what I should *really* be doing is to help Daniel with his
> rewrite!
If you, or anyone else, really wants to work on it, please do.
At the moment, the known issues are:
* Probably needs some compatibility functions to work with Emacs.
* Limited set of file operations ported.
* DANGER! I have met data corruption of non-tramp buffers using it.
I believe the bug causing it to eat non-tramp buffers is gone.
The data corruption bug may still exist.
Anyway, if you /do/ work on it, the variable
`tramp2-unhandled-operations' is your friend. It contains all
file-operations that Emacs wanted and that are not implemented.
Daniel
--
Among persons under 30, the inability to program is regarded as a form
of illiteracy. -- James Martin
(Comment predicting trends of the late 1990s, Made in the early 70's)
