Bryan Phinney said: > On Thursday 04 September 2003 01:03 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Bryan Phinney said: > >> > Not sure what language it was written in, but it is definitely compiled >> > code >> > so you would need to decompile it or look at it with a hex editor to try >> > to >> > figure out what the original language was. >> > -- >> > Bryan Phinney >> > Software Test Engineer >> >> Well, I was under the impression that windows decided how to handle a >> program based on the extension; i.e., if you call a .jpg a .blah, even >> though it has photoshop installed on the machine, it will choke and say it >> doesn't know how to open a .blah file. > > That is true for non-binary files. Binary files are executed, they do not > need an associated application be named in the registry or any other place. > >> Maybe if you renamed the .jpg to .tif though, you could get the photoshop >> program to open and then it would take over and decide to display the >> image correctly? > > Probably as long as it is capable of displaying both image types. Again, you > are relating application specific non-binary file types to binary file types, > they are not the same animal. > >> In my short research on google, I read that a pif was similar to a bat >> file; can a bat file contain compiled code also? > > No, they are not compiled, but they are still executed. The key here is that > binaries are executed, it doesn't matter how you call them because they do > not require any specific application to be installed other than the OS. > > For comparison, if I specify the bash shell in a shell script and make it > executable, I can use any name or extension that I want and the file will > remain executable and if I issue the command ./command.whatever it will still > execute. > > So, I could call the file command.do.this.jpg and it will still execute, just > like any file in Windows named .pif will try to execute when clicked on, > regardless of the what it actually is.
Well this where (and I don't have an available windows box in front of me...) I'm getting my confusion. I've renamed files in windows and watched windows get confused by them. Rename an exe file to txt and it will try to open in notepad - since notepad doesn't have the ability to execute files, it will display gibberish (or most likely it will say that it's to big for notepad and it will suggest wordpad instead). If you rename it to jpg, whatever your registered jpeg viewer is will try to open it, then it will give you an error. I understand that a bash script will try to execute anything with the exec bit set - but that's linux not windows. > > For fun assignment: Rename a .jpg image to .pif and click on it in Windows > Explorer. Now, insert the Mandrake Install CD and remove the crappy > operating system. Wasn't that fun! ;-} =) that would be an interesting experiment... > -- > Bryan Phinney > Software Test Engineer > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? > Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com >
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
