Re: Changes in the ESL papers
Pete Lomax wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 21:20:10 +0200, Juergen Luethje wrote:
>
>>> We should require that all files (both documentation and code) have
>>> 8.3 file names (8 characters a '.' then the 3 character extention) so
>>> that the files remain readable on DOS machines.
>>
>> This is often possible without pain (eg. math.e, string.e, cgi.e), but
>> maybe sometimes only with considerable pain? I'm not sure.
>> People could use my contribution 'Lfn.zip' to get full long filename
>> support for their Euphoria DOS programs. 
>
> The best way I know of to create a .zip file using a .bat script under
> windows is to use pkzip 2.04g, which does not handle long filenames.
> Unfortunately, I cannot change pkzip 2.04g to use lfn.zip 
)
)
I believed that about 10 years after introducing LFN in the DOS/Windows
world, even most DOS programs support them. OK, rather old DOS programs
certainly can't do so.
> I'm not sure what/when/where you imagine this considerable pain,
I was meaning the pain that I feel, when I want to name a file say
'important_document.txt', but I'm forced to name it 'imp_doc.txt' or
'imprtndc.txt'.
> but I
> can tell you that building releases of applications when the standard
> library does not use 8.3 filenames will be harder to automate.
>
> Regards,
> Pete
> PS Actually, I have a freeware copy of the commandline pkzipc (2.5?,
> 4.0?, it's hard to tell, even pkware don't seem to know) which does
> handle long filenames, but only on 95, 98, & Me, not on NT, 2000, or
> XP. It seems it went payware.
So you yourself do not pkzip 2.04g?
Maybe we can make a poll ( on UBoard ):
Who uses Euphoria together with DOS programs that can't handle LFN ?
Regards,
Juergen
--
/"\ ASCII ribbon campain | This message has been ROT-13 encrypted
\ / against HTML in | twice for higher security.
X e-mail and news, |
/ \ and unneeded MIME | http://home.arcor.de/luethje/prog/
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
