Re: shell files in packaging/win32 better with extensions

2007-05-01 Thread Derek Atkins
Christian Stimming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Am Montag, 30. April 2007 23:38 schrieb Derek Atkins: >> I just suggest people use svn to download that directory instead >> of pulling the files from trac. But that's just my $0.02. > > You're totally right - in fact, that's what we already > su

Re: shell files in packaging/win32 better with extensions

2007-05-01 Thread Christian Stimming
Am Montag, 30. April 2007 23:38 schrieb Derek Atkins: > I just suggest people use svn to download that directory instead > of pulling the files from trac. But that's just my $0.02. You're totally right - in fact, that's what we already suggest. Regardless of whether this is from trac or from h

Re: shell files in packaging/win32 better with extensions

2007-04-30 Thread Derek Atkins
I just suggest people use svn to download that directory instead of pulling the files from trac. But that's just my $0.02. You can rename the files if you wish. -derek Christian Stimming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi Andi, > > just today I got my new WinXP Laptop and I started to use the >

Re: shell files in packaging/win32 better with extensions

2007-04-26 Thread Andreas Köhler
Hiho, Christian Stimming schrieb: > Am Donnerstag, 26. April 2007 11:21 schrieb Andreas Köhler: just today I got my new WinXP Laptop and I started to use the gnucash-on-windows build again. So far everything runs fine - with one exception: When initially downloading the content of p

Re: shell files in packaging/win32 better with extensions

2007-04-26 Thread Beth Leonard
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 09:55:40PM +0200, Christian Stimming wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 26. April 2007 11:21 schrieb Andreas K?hler: > > > > up with "defaults.htm" instead of "defaults", and "functions" the same. > > > > Whereas the questions whether "foo.sh" motivates people to try running those > I

Re: shell files in packaging/win32 better with extensions

2007-04-26 Thread Christian Stimming
Am Donnerstag, 26. April 2007 11:21 schrieb Andreas Köhler: > > > just today I got my new WinXP Laptop and I started to use the > > > gnucash-on-windows build again. So far everything runs fine - with one > > > exception: When initially downloading the content of packaging/win32, > > > the > > > fa

Re: shell files in packaging/win32 better with extensions

2007-04-26 Thread Andreas Köhler
Hi, "Nathan Buchanan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 4/25/07, Christian Stimming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi Andi, > > > > just today I got my new WinXP Laptop and I started to use the > > gnucash-on-windows build again. So far everything runs fine - with one > > exception: When initial

Re: shell files in packaging/win32 better with extensions

2007-04-25 Thread Nathan Buchanan
On 4/25/07, Christian Stimming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Andi, > > just today I got my new WinXP Laptop and I started to use the > gnucash-on-windows build again. So far everything runs fine - with one > exception: When initially downloading the content of packaging/win32, the > fact that s

shell files in packaging/win32 better with extensions

2007-04-25 Thread Christian Stimming
Hi Andi, just today I got my new WinXP Laptop and I started to use the gnucash-on-windows build again. So far everything runs fine - with one exception: When initially downloading the content of packaging/win32, the fact that some files don't have an extension really confuses Windows. I ended