Message-Id: Date: Thu, 12 Nov 98 14:20:24 MET From: RJ vd Boon To: Eli Zaretskii cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: TeX/Web2c v7.2b ported and uploaded Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com In your letter dated Wed, 11 Nov 1998 12:15:14 +0200 (IST), you wrote: > I tried several unzippers, and all of them didn't restore the > read-only bit on directories (my version of Unzip is rather old). So > I assumed most of the people won't get it restored, and documented > that situation. Later I unzipped with my unzipper again, and the bit was not restored either. Hmmm, unzipper's ways seem to be undefined after all (this makes me wonder how I did get the RO-bit set. I certainly did not set them myself, and as I'm the only one using this machine... Lets call it a bug in win98 dos-box, most likely (as usual) ;-) > The directories are zipped with that bit because that's how they are > on my system. I thought so already. > I guess I could have done it in a more consistent way, either by > resetting the attribute before preparing the zip archives, or by > explaining some more about this in the README. Perhaps yes. But if the bulk of unzippers doesn't set the RO-bit, there shouldn't be many people having this problem at all. [snip PS about DJGPP-dvlj2.6 and latest version: dviljk-2.8] > > Or should I just compile and try it myself (and upload if stable)? > This is always a good idea. Please go ahead. Closer inspection shows there is no need to do that. (your 2.6)==2.8 2.8 is the release using kpathsea 3.2 (instead of 3.0) + djgpp support + the change in tfm.c which you applied also. bye now, Robert