Currently Darcs provides an application-specific way to set SSH
settings.  Does anyone actually use these?  If they do, why isn't
ssh_config(5) a viable and superior alternative?

>From the existing documentation:

  SSH_PORT
    When using ssh, if the SSH\_PORT environment variable is defined,
    darcs will use that port rather than the default ssh port (which
    is 22).

  DARCS_SSH
    The DARCS_SSH environment variable defines the command that darcs
    will use when asked to run ssh.  This command is NOT interpreted
    by a shell, so you cannot use shell metacharacters, and the first
    word in the command must be the name of an executable located in
    your path.

  DARCS_SCP and DARCS_SFTP
    The DARCS_SCP and DARCS_SFTP environment variables define the
    commands that darcs will use when asked to run scp or sftp.  Darcs
    uses scp and sftp to access repositories whose address is of the
    form user@foo.org:foo or foo.org:foo.  Darcs will use scp to copy
    single files (e.g. repository meta-information), and sftp to copy
    multiple files in batches (e.g. patches).  These commands are NOT
    interpreted by a shell, so you cannot use shell metacharacters,
    and the first word in the command must be the name of an
    executable located in your path.  By default, scp and sftp are
    used.  When you can use sftp, but not scp (e.g. some ISP web
    sites), it works to set DARCS_SCP to `sftp'.  The other way around
    does not work, i.e. DARCS_FTP must reference an sftp program, not
    scp.

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 4:23 AM, Trent Buck <bugs@darcs.net> wrote:
>
> New submission from Trent Buck <trentbuck@gmail.com>:
>
> Currently Darcs provides an application-specific way to set SSH
> settings.  Does anyone actually use these?  If they do, why isn't
> ssh_config(5) a viable and superior alternative?

Actually I think that DARCS_SSH is pretty important on Windows, where
there're many ssh clients.

That said, I've still to take a serious look to darcs SSH support in Windows.

On Monday 11 May 2009, Trent Buck wrote:
> 
> New submission from Trent Buck <trentbuck@gmail.com>:
> 
> Currently Darcs provides an application-specific way to set SSH
> settings.  Does anyone actually use these?  If they do, why isn't
> ssh_config(5) a viable and superior alternative?

I guess they are useful if you use an alternate ssh implementation (like 
putty on windows) that doesn't have ssh_config.

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 09:30:09AM +0300, Dan Pascu wrote:
>> Currently Darcs provides an application-specific way to set SSH
>> settings.  Does anyone actually use these?  If they do, why isn't
>> ssh_config(5) a viable and superior alternative?
>
> I guess they are useful if you use an alternate ssh implementation
> (like putty on windows) that doesn't have ssh_config.

Nod.  I had forgotten about Windows, and I couldn't remember if Unix
SSH clients like dropbear had an equivalent of ssh_config.

Trent Buck <bugs@darcs.net> writes:
> Nod.  I had forgotten about Windows, and I couldn't remember if Unix
> SSH clients like dropbear had an equivalent of ssh_config.

ssh -R 2000:localhost:22 somewhere.else
SSH_PORT=2000 darcs get localhost:some/repo

: - )

Yours,
   Petr.

On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 01:27:29PM -0000, Petr Ročkai wrote:
> ssh -R 2000:localhost:22 somewhere.else
> SSH_PORT=2000 darcs get localhost:some/repo

Under what circumstances is that preferable to "darcs get
somewhere.else:some/repo"?

Now, if you were connecting to a server "fs" behind a gateway "gw"

    ssh -fNL 2000:fs:22 gw
    SSH_PORT=2000 darcs get 127.0.0.1:dir

Then I would say it'd be easier long-term to set up

    cat >>~/.ssh/config <<EOF
    Host fs
    ProxyCommand ssh gw nc %h %p
    EOF

    darcs get fs:dir

For example, if you log out and log back in, SSH_PORT won't be set,
and "darcs pull" will Just Work only in the ssh_config-based version.

That's a reverse operation, IIUIC. ssh -R forwards your local (say, laptop)
sshd to the remote end, and lets you grab a repository from your laptop easily
(without using the broken "put" operation).

I'm not sure what this means, with -L (instead of -R), but I suspect it's
reverse again.

Yours,
   Petr.