On 2006-01-27, rbt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK I finally get it. It's too good to be true :)
Sorry about that. I should have paid closer attention to what you were going to do with the file. > I'm going back to using _real_ files... files that don't look > as if they are there but aren't. BTW, the file 'size' and > 'size on disk' were identical on win 2003. That's a bit > deceptive. What?! Windows lying to the user? I don't believe it! > According to the NTFS docs, they should be drastically > different... 'size on disk' should be like 64K or something. Probably. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Where's th' DAFFY at DUCK EXHIBIT?? visi.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list