Sender: nate AT cartsys DOT com
Message-ID: <36365A5B.D92F78D7@cartsys.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:42:19 -0800
From: Nate Eldredge <nate AT cartsys DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.35 i486)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com, dj AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: C++ with DJGPP
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Mike Ruskai wrote:
> 
> On 27 Oct 1998 09:41:42 GMT, Boon van der RJ wrote:
> 
> >Mike Ruskai <thanny AT spambegone DOT home DOT com> wrote:
> >> The trick for you is to edit the djgpp.env file and change 'n' to 'y' for
> >> long filenames, since the Win95 kludge allows for DOS programs to see long
> >> names.
> >
> >Not the best advice. The canonical way to do it is to set LFN=y in
> >your environment (autoexec.bat). Editing DJGPP.ENV is often awkward,
> >and could get you in big problems. (although the +LFN=n is quite
> >straightforward).
> 
> It's right at the top of the file.  Moreover, the instructions given on the
> web page for downloading DJGPP explicitly say to edit that file for precisely
> that purpose.

Then, IMHO, it should be changed. DJ?

> On top of that, I find the notion of a text file edit being awkward rather
> silly.  Especially when we're talking about a software package which entails
> people editing text files before running the program.

On the other hand, there have been several cases of bizarre screwage
that have been traced to mis-editing of DJGPP.ENV.  It wasn't designed
to be edited by users, and not a lot of trouble is taken to make it
user-friendly.  There was one long-standing bug brought on by blank
lines at the end of the file-- not a problem if the user stuck with the
distributed version, but edit it, and watch out!

I personally agree that editing a text file is a trivial thing to get
right, but there are total newbies out there.  Someone is sure to edit
it with Microsloth Word, and then complain that DJGPP doesn't work.  And
if the user uses something like RHIDE, they don't even need to know how
to write/edit a text file.
 
> >> 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. If
> >you use OS2 you just have to know to unpack with PKUNZIP. IMHO it's
> >always best to stick to the original as close as possible (what about
> >a package that #includes streambuf.h directly, on a win95 system?)
> 
> 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.

That is *not* a good solution.  Unless you're advocating total removal
of LFN support (IMHO a worse thing), any name with extra characters
would cease to work, even though it would work fine on an 8+3 platform. 
So, as the previous poster pointed out, #include <streambuf.h> in a user
program would die horribly under Windows.  People would have to use your
script to change it to #include <streambu.h>, and then their source
wouldn't work when they try to compile it on a Unix box.

> Relying on the behavior of a dearchiver program is the Wrong Thing to do.

I agree that it's unfortunate, but I cannot see any better way.
-- 

Nate Eldredge
nate AT cartsys DOT com