 |
 |
Hi Andy, this is how a url looks like: [proto://][user[:passwd]@]host[:port]/file.ext[#anchor][?options] where the slash after the host description is just a separator, not part of host nor path. In the above case file.exe start at the begin of the exported file space (being xrootd or httpd). Cheers, Fons On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 19:42, Andrew Hanushevsky wrote: > Hi Fabrizio, > > I guess I'm trying to understand which is the right way of interpreting the > urls. Is the slash after the host name considered part of the host name or > part of the path. That is the question. What does the standard say? > > As for the ambiguous unix syntax, well it's not ambiguous because as far as > xrootd is concerned the path must start with a slash (relative paths are not > allowed). So, > > [user[:pwd]@]host[:port]:/path > > We can trivially split out: > > user[:pwd]@]host[:port]: > > Then we trivially split out > > user[:pwd]@ (which may be null) > > host[:port] > > >From here you can see there is no ambiguity. > > Andy > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Fabrizio Furano" <[log in to unmask]> > To: "Andrew Hanushevsky" <[log in to unmask]> > Cc: "Fabrizio Furano" <[log in to unmask]>; "Xrootd Mailing List" > <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 1:13 AM > Subject: Re: Xrdcp MPEG demo - Xrdcp syntax > > > > Hi Andy, > > > > Yes, there is a difference. Internally the two urls are parsed and in > > the former case "xyzzy" is considered as path/file, while in the latter > > it's "/xyzzy". > > This behavior comes directly from root's TUrl. > > > > The unix syntax seems a good idea to me. Also because there is no need > > to limit the transfer to root files. > > > > In this case, however, I need to specify user, pwd and port number. > > > > So, the new syntax for remote files could be: > > > > [user[:pwd]@]host[:port]:path > > > > but in this case there would be an ambiguity problem, since e.g. > > noric02:3456 can mean "file 3456 on noric02" or "the current directory > > on noric02 port 3456" > > > > Any comment? > > > > Fabrizio > > > > Andrew Hanushevsky wrote: > > > Hi Habrizio, > > > > > > It seems to work just fine; thank you. > > > > > > Now, there seems to be a diffrence of opinion on how urls are to be > > > interpreted. What is the difference wbetween: root://host/xyzzy and > > > root://host//xyzzy (there clearly is a difference). > > > > > > Also, could you accept (in xrdcp) the unix syntax of <host>:path ? > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Fabrizio Furano" <[log in to unmask]> > > > To: "Andrew Hanushevsky" <[log in to unmask]> > > > Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 7:57 AM > > > Subject: Xrdcp MPEG demo > > > > > > > > > > > >>Hi Andy, > > >> > > >> the head of xrdclient seems very good to me now for your demo. I > > >>suggest you to make some tests with it in conjuction with plaympeg. For > > >>example, I discovered that in my laptop I am unable to show more than a > > >>mpeg window at a time. Not for the performances. The second window reads > > >>the data ok but show itself black. > > >>Is it the same for you? > > >> > > >>Fabrizio > > >> > > -- Org: CERN, European Laboratory for Particle Physics. Mail: 1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland E-Mail: [log in to unmask] Phone: +41 22 7679248 WWW: http://www.rademakers.org/fons/ Fax: +41 22 7679480