Re: Latest Win32 binaries

On Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 04:12:51AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2001 at 05:28:48PM +0200, Michael Wood wrote:
> >...
> > I don't think file://d:/blah is a valid URL, so you might try
>
> Yes, it is a valid URL. Consider http://host:port/path ...

That's completely different, and I suspect it's supposed to be
http://host[:port]/blah, in which case http://host:/blah would
be invalid (I haven't checked the relevant RFC, though.)

Also, file:///blah is supposed to be equivalent to
file://localhost/blah AFAIK.

"d" is not a hostname, so how could file://d:/blah be valid?
And d: is not a host:port either.

Maybe this is valid:

file:///d:/blah (three slashes before the "d".)

> > dealing with it the way Netscape did:
> >
> > file:///d|/blah
> >
> > i.e. three /'s and a pipe symbol instead of a colon.
>
> Bogus.

:) They probably had some reason for it, but I won't argue.

> Probably just a simple parse error somewhere...

-- 
Michael Wood
mwood@its.uct.ac.za
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org