Re: Managed mounts and .exe files (Was Re: cp, install, and the .exe extension)

2004-02-23 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 21 23:07, Robert R Schneck wrote: > Igor Pechtchanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > FWIW, WinNT/2k/XP allow executables to not have a .exe extension. > > I wasn't aware of it, and haven't been able to figure it out in a couple > of minutes of playing around and Googling. How? On NT, the

Re: Managed mounts and .exe files (Was Re: cp, install, and the .exe extension)

2004-02-21 Thread Robert R Schneck
Igor Pechtchanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Robert R Schneck-McConnell wrote: >> Hey, it might be interesting for managed mounts *really* to identify the >> filenames "foo" and "foo.exe". (Maybe they already do?) > > Huh? What do you mean by "identify" here? If you mean "

Managed mounts and .exe files (Was Re: cp, install, and the .exe extension)

2004-02-21 Thread Igor Pechtchanski
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Robert R Schneck-McConnell wrote: > [snip] > Hey, it might be interesting for managed mounts *really* to identify the > filenames "foo" and "foo.exe". (Maybe they already do?) > > Robert Huh? What do you mean by "identify" here? If you mean "equate", this most likely won't

Re: cp, install, and the .exe extension

2004-02-21 Thread Robert R Schneck-McConnell
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Larry Hall wrote: [on changing the error message when cp can stat but not open a file due to .exe handling] > How about a patch instead of a request? ;-) Okay, attached. I've also attached a textutils patch to enact my earlier request that "cat > foo" create foo in the whate

Re: cp, install, and the .exe extension

2004-02-20 Thread Larry Hall
At 01:33 PM 2/20/2004, Robert R Schneck you wrote: >Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 10:09:55PM +, Robert R Schneck wrote: >>>If I replace "copy.c" with either of the other two and rebuild, I get a >>>"cp" which *does* have special handling for the .exe

Re: cp, install, and the .exe extension

2004-02-20 Thread Robert R Schneck
Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 10:09:55PM +, Robert R Schneck wrote: >>If I replace "copy.c" with either of the other two and rebuild, I get a >>"cp" which *does* have special handling for the .exe extension. >>Did the fileutils maintainer just forget t

Re: cp, install, and the .exe extension

2004-02-19 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 10:09:55PM +, Robert R Schneck wrote: >This is a bug in the fileutils packaging (I think). > >Recently I noticed that "install" has special handling for the .exe >extension, and "cp" does not. In the fileutils source tarball >I notice there are three files: > copy.c

cp, install, and the .exe extension

2004-02-19 Thread Robert R Schneck
This is a bug in the fileutils packaging (I think). Recently I noticed that "install" has special handling for the .exe extension, and "cp" does not. In the fileutils source tarball I notice there are three files: copy.c copy.c.cgf copy.c.orig If I replace "copy.c" with either of the other