Re: testing for a remote file to include file on a Windows mapped drive

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden
> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:46:10 -0400
> 
> >> This may require some changes in file-relative-name, because this one
> >> does use file-remote-p in a more specific way, but everything else I've
> >> looked at uses file-remote-p as a way to test "fast&reliable or not".
> 
> > Like I said, it's a mystery to me why you insist on changing
> > file-remote-p for a different semantics.
> 
> I'm saying it's not a different semantics.

I'm obviously failing to explain myself, because I was trying to say
that the current semantics is: ``remote'' files are files accessed via
a handler, as opposed to normal file I/O API (`open', `read', etc.).