-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 259
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
mount /sdcard/ #1801
Open
lollilol
wants to merge
2
commits into
GSConnect:main
Choose a base branch
from
lollilol:patch-1
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
mount /sdcard/ #1801
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If I'm right, then this should be...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks correct if we're happy to access only the Android device's internal storage.
However, if I plug a USB thumb-drive into my phone, I get:
We should probably mount each of these.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mavit
Ugggh, that's really ugly. The worst part of it is, the
packet.body.path
is no longer even an ancestor of both (all) of themultiPaths
listed. I was hoping at least browsingpacket.body.path
and seeing both of the mounts under it would be possible.Given the data you've provided, I agree — we should stop trying to browse a single "device filesystem root" at all, and just separately mount each of the
multiPaths
entries, however meany there are.In theory we could have UI to select which one to mount, but that already feels more complicated than necessary. If the user has multiple filesystems exported on the device, and chooses to mount it, they should just get all of them.
But it's even more clear now that we should never try to browse either
sftp://${host}:${packet.body.port}/
orsftp://${host}:${packet.body.port}/${packet.body.path}/
, since neither one represents the root of the remote filesystem. (There is, in fact, no path that does.)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The really sucky thing is that, if I'm interpreting this right, there isn't going to be anything to indicate which mount point is which. I don't think we can set volume labels on the remote mount points, and I'm not sure GVFS will pick them up from the KDEConnect side either.
I guess we can modify
_addSymlink
to create${by_name_dir.get_path()}/${safe_device_name}
as a directory, instead of as the symbolic link itself, and then create one symlink for each mount point inside that directory. Then at least we'll have a mapping of the remote mount points to their names.