From: Jason Green Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Weekly Mini-FAQ post for DJGPP Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 20:39:25 +0100 Lines: 23 Message-ID: <12v9qt4seutpl5k45udgethh57gjibm2nj@4ax.com> References: <200109100500 DOT BAA12378 AT delorie DOT com> <3BA371F0 DOT 2D0BEE68 AT yahoo DOT com> <1438-Sat15Sep2001190651+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <3BA4C7ED DOT 72A516F7 AT uol DOT com DOT br> NNTP-Posting-Host: modem-216.carbon.dialup.pol.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news8.svr.pol.co.uk 1000669214 3084 62.136.5.216 (16 Sep 2001 19:40:14 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Sep 2001 19:40:14 GMT X-Complaints-To: abuse AT theplanet DOT net X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Cesar Rabak wrote: > > > Not that I object to adding the zip file names, but if we are going to > > > do that, we should probably change the format as well: > > > > > > binutils-2.11.2 bnu2112b.zip, bnu2112s.zip > > > bison-1.29 bsn129b.zip, bsn129s.zip > > > > Timestamp and filesize should probably be listed too, to catch the cases > > when a package is re-released under the same name. > > > > How about also prefixing each line with an asterix if the package is less > > than a month old? > > Whereas I second these nice ideas, I believe it is time to consider they > should be implemented by use of some sort of script to automate this > otherwise, we're putting too much burden in DJ! Absolutely! But first it must be decided *if* the format should change, and then what it should change to. Even without listing the filenames or other details, it would be useful to see at a glance any new or re-released packages, IMHO.