[MPlayer-dev-eng] Re: MPlayer-dev-eng digest, Vol 1 #1363 - 5 msgs

[Vladimir Moushkov]

 >Message: 4
 >Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 22:26:18 +0200
 >From: =?iso-8859-2?B?R+Fib3IgTOlu4XJ0?= <lgb at lgb.hu>
 >To: mplayer-dev-eng at mplayerhq.hu
 >Subject: Re: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] Added new protocol smb://
 >Reply-To: mplayer-dev-eng at mplayerhq.hu
 >
 >On Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 10:31:43PM +0200, Arpi wrote:
 >> Hi,
 >> 
 >> > Sorry if I miss something but I would like to ask: why?
 >> > In general, UNIX is about modularity. Thus since Linux already supports
 >> > mounting SMB shares why do you need this? It's like you include full NFS
 >> > client in user space just because you don't like mounting NFS exported
 >> > directory first, than use that. It would turn into VERY complex and large
 >> > code to include several (networked) filesystem direct support into mplayer
 >> > while the certain fs is already supported by Linux (kernel).
 >> 
 >> I have to disagree.
 >
 >I have too :)
 Yeah, you right, but let me tell ya: 
 why nobody needs NFS, ftp and such will be included in MPlayer as part of code (for ftp I am little disagree), so my oppinion is that NFS is used in big stables net, when one user mount something from server (note one server!) this is permantly... So how it is situation in the Netbios lan:
while it is made for stable lans - the netbios lans are more unstable and dynamic lans I've ever seen. If you don't believe take a trip to Sofia, Bulgaria - Student town. So one day one guy decide it going to have a share named films, on next day he changed the name or removed it. Let me note that there not only one server where are you can find films... so the situation going to be more complicated more and more...
So believe me the mounting is not decision (every time you think to watch film you have to find the film -> http://moushkov.hit.bg/crawler is answer, when you find it have to download it <- dummy, or mount the share <- to mount you need root!?!?!!!, once mounted, if the host left, you probly forgot to unmount ... so let me explain whats happening while trying to use [TAB] in directory where are mounting points with disconected mount point). I think smb:// must be include but ... You  all take 
the decision.

 >
 >> Since you can mount FTP shares (ftpfs), why do you need an FTP client? :)
 >> Or why do you use wget to get a file from a given url, instead of mounting,
 >> cp, umount it?
 >
 >But smbfs is part of standard "official" kernel, while ftpfs is not.
 >So virtualy almost everybody can use smbfs (imho kernels of distributions
 >have this compiled in), while ftpfs needs some patching, and AFAIK ftpfs
 >is not well maintained and has some problems.
 >
 >So OK, maybe you're right but it's the SAME when we're speaking about NFS.
 >So if you're right here, someone should implement a user space NFS client
 >inside mplayer just for avoiding mounts?
 >
 >What is wrong about mounting file systems? Even Microsoft started to move
 >towards that, though they're naming it "filesystem reparse point" or something
 >similar.
 >
 >> > Also, if mounting is not good for you, there is a library (however I forgot
 >> > its name) which can be forced to use with LD PRELOAD and it will handle
 >> > some libc file functions on its own to allow to use //machine/share ... etc
 >> > like "paths" as you expect like native "unix paths" without a single line
 >> > changed in the source of the application.
 >> hmm. it sounds really more unix-friendly :)
 >
 >Not for me :) But if somebody wants this, you don't need to hack up source
 >of mplayer just for this functionality. 
 >
 >- Gбbor (larta'H)
 Please try to show me this thing ... but I really wondering is this the best ???? I don't know

-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.Netinfo.bg - Новият дизайн!