On 2006-01-27, rbt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK I finally get it. It's too good to be true :)
Sorry about that. I should have paid closer attention to what
you were going to do with the file.
> I'm going back to using _real_ files... files that don't look
> as if they are there but aren't. BTW, the file 'size' and
> 'size on disk' were identical on win 2003. That's a bit
> deceptive.
What?! Windows lying to the user? I don't believe it!
> According to the NTFS docs, they should be drastically
> different... 'size on disk' should be like 64K or something.
Probably.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Where's th' DAFFY
at DUCK EXHIBIT??
visi.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
