From: sos AT prospect DOT com DOT ru (Sergey Okhapkin) Subject: RE: Another coff.h question (fwd) 4 Feb 1998 01:06:39 -0800 Message-ID: <01BD3155.1D3892F0.cygnus.cygwin32.developers@gater.krystalbank.msk.ru> Reply-To: cygwin32-developers AT cygnus DOT com To: "'cygwin32-developers AT cygnus DOT com'" Geoffrey Noer wrote: > Andy Piper wrote: > >I think a.out.h is pretty standard. Possibly we could get by with just > >calling it a.out.h. > > emacs' coff unexec includes one of coff.h, coff-encap/a.out.encap.h, a.out.h > > If a.out.h is agreeable to everyone then call it a.out.h. Its certainly no > less obvious what it is for than coff.h. > > Can you let me know of your decision since I will have to change XEmacs. > What about to put into the distribution coff.h and a.out.h as a wrapper to coff.h? -- Sergey Okhapkin, http://www.lexa.ru/sos Moscow, Russia Looking for a job.