From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: From: Russ Cox To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] telnet Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 15:37:30 -0400 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 6bea4a98-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > > There already seems to be some movement towards this naming convention, > > eg in upasfs(4): > > > > Fs interprets mailbox file names of the form > > /proto/host/user to mean access an account on host using the > > given protocol. > > i'm not too keen on this kind of thing, in addition to the reasons > quoted by geoff, because such a directory structure is inherently > unenumerable. the upas/fs hack was never intended to stand as an example of the way things ought to be done. it solved the problem of naming remote mailboxes and it has served well, but as geoff pointed out, it is very much not a good idea in general. it's not even a good idea in this case (as rog points out) but it does happen to get the job done some useful fraction of the time.