Nate Diller wrote: > On 12/8/05, *Hubert Chan* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > wrote: > > On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:12:46 +0000, Peter Foldiak said: > > [...] > > > You say "author" should be an attribute but "icon.png" is not an > > attribute. I am not convinced they should be treated > differently. The > > listing doesn't look ugly to me at all (just because it is long). > > IMHO, putting attributes in foo/ instead of foo/@/ increases the > risk of > collisions. e.g. let's say I have a directory that contains a file > named icon.png, but I want my file manager to display its icon as some > other file. If all the attributes are in foo/, then the file manager > will read foo/icon.png as the directory's icon, which is not what I > want. It would be better if I could have a directory that contains > icon.png, and uses foo/@/icon.png as its icon in the file manager. > > > This problem is already solved. > > $ ls /home/nate > icon.png > > $ ls -a /home/nate > . > .. > .bash_rc > icon.png > > so... > > $ls -aa /home/nate > . > .. > ..icon.png > .bash_rc > icon.png > > this works for PvH's example too: > $ ls -aa app/ > . > .. > ..author > ..category > ..contact > ..description > ..name > ..version > .config > .default_options > bin > lib > src > var > Makefile > icon.png > install.sh > > NATE
yup
