On Feb 21 23:07, Robert R Schneck wrote:
Igor Pechtchanski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW, WinNT/2k/XP allow executables to not have a .exe extension.
I wasn't aware of it, and haven't been able to figure it out in a couple
of minutes of playing around and Googling. How?
On NT, the
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Larry Hall wrote:
[on changing the error message when cp can stat but not open a file
due to .exe handling]
How about a patch instead of a request? ;-)
Okay, attached. I've also attached a textutils patch to enact my earlier
request that cat foo create foo in the whatever
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Robert R Schneck-McConnell wrote:
[snip]
Hey, it might be interesting for managed mounts *really* to identify the
filenames foo and foo.exe. (Maybe they already do?)
Robert
Huh? What do you mean by identify here? If you mean equate, this
most likely won't happen. If
Igor Pechtchanski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Robert R Schneck-McConnell wrote:
Hey, it might be interesting for managed mounts *really* to identify the
filenames foo and foo.exe. (Maybe they already do?)
Huh? What do you mean by identify here? If you mean equate, this
This is a bug in the fileutils packaging (I think).
Recently I noticed that install has special handling for the .exe
extension, and cp does not. In the fileutils source tarball
I notice there are three files:
copy.c copy.c.cgf copy.c.orig
If I replace copy.c with either of the other two
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 10:09:55PM +, Robert R Schneck wrote:
This is a bug in the fileutils packaging (I think).
Recently I noticed that install has special handling for the .exe
extension, and cp does not. In the fileutils source tarball
I notice there are three files:
copy.c
6 matches
Mail list logo
