From:	Ian Miller <itmiller AT dera DOT gov DOT uk>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: C++ with DJGPP
Date:	29 Oct 1998 13:40:52 +0000
Organization:	Defence Evaluation & Research Agency
Message-ID:	<873e87lc4a.fsf@hasn.dera.gov.uk>
References:	<363532BA DOT 6FA0626F AT erols DOT com> <gunaalubzrpbz DOT f1gwzw0 DOT pminews AT news DOT avnl1 DOT nj DOT home DOT com> <7144gm$i1n$1 AT star DOT cs DOT vu DOT nl> <gunaalubzrpbz DOT f1hyic2 DOT pminews AT news DOT avnl1 DOT nj DOT home DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	146.80.115.106
X-Newsreader:	Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.3
Lines:	26
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

"Rude Mike Ruskai" <thanny AT spambegone DOT home DOT com> writes:

> On 27 Oct 1998 09:41:42 GMT, Boon van der RJ wrote:
> 
> >Mike Ruskai <thanny AT spambegone DOT home DOT com> wrote:
> >> A pretty stupid way to pack up the archive, if you ask me.  It should be
> >> short names, period, with scripts to rename files and patch sources to use
> >> long names.
> >
> >I don't think it should be like that. If you just use DOS an
> >LFN-packed archive is OK. If you just use WIN95 an LFN-archive is even
> >better. If you use both DOS and Win95 you should follow the FAQ...
> 
> You seem to be missing the point.  The script would rename the files and
> correct the filenames in all #include's from the header files.  
> 
> Relying on the behavior of a dearchiver program is the Wrong Thing to do.

Cobblers! "You seem to be missing the point" that renaming the LFNs to
SFNs and having a script to rename them back again is completely unnecessary
(provided that you RTFM). Period.

-- 
Ian Miller, Dorset, UK
The views expressed above are those of the writer and do not represent the
views, policy, or understanding of any other person or official body.

- Raw text -