On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
> > On Mon, [EMAIL PROTECTED]:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED]:49:27AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> > > >Also, I'd prefer /etc/setup.rc rather that /etc/setup/setup.cfg.
> > >
> > > Wouldn't /etc/setuprc be somewhat more consistent with existing unix
> > > practices?
> >
> > Sure. I'm happy with that too. Mind you, having an extension allows
> > association of a handler in the windows GUI.
> >
>
> *.rc is a Windows resource file though.
... which was the primary reason for my suggesting .cfg in the first
place. I'm ok with both setuprc and setup.rc, through (leaning towards
setuprc, if we go with Unix style).
Igor
--
http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
|\ _,,,---,,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
Oh, boy, virtual memory! Now I'm gonna make myself a really *big* RAMdisk!
-- /usr/games/fortune
