Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp From: "Mike Ruskai" Message-ID: References: <363532BA DOT 6FA0626F AT erols DOT com> <7144gm$i1n$1 AT star DOT cs DOT vu DOT nl> <36365A5B DOT D92F78D7 AT cartsys DOT com> X-Newsreader: PMINews 2.00.1201 For OS/2 Organization: TLF MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: C++ with DJGPP Lines: 81 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 23:39:58 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.3.130.120 NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:39:58 PDT To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:42:19 -0800, Nate Eldredge wrote: >Mike Ruskai wrote: >> >> On 27 Oct 1998 09:41:42 GMT, Boon van der RJ wrote: >> >> >Mike Ruskai wrote: >> >> The trick for you is to edit the djgpp.env file and change 'n' to 'y' for >> >> long filenames, since the Win95 kludge allows for DOS programs to see long >> >> names. >> > >> >Not the best advice. The canonical way to do it is to set LFN=y in >> >your environment (autoexec.bat). Editing DJGPP.ENV is often awkward, >> >and could get you in big problems. (although the +LFN=n is quite >> >straightforward). >> >> It's right at the top of the file. Moreover, the instructions given on the >> web page for downloading DJGPP explicitly say to edit that file for precisely >> that purpose. > >Then, IMHO, it should be changed. DJ? > >> On top of that, I find the notion of a text file edit being awkward rather >> silly. Especially when we're talking about a software package which entails >> people editing text files before running the program. > >On the other hand, there have been several cases of bizarre screwage >that have been traced to mis-editing of DJGPP.ENV. It wasn't designed >to be edited by users, and not a lot of trouble is taken to make it >user-friendly. There was one long-standing bug brought on by blank >lines at the end of the file-- not a problem if the user stuck with the >distributed version, but edit it, and watch out! > >I personally agree that editing a text file is a trivial thing to get >right, but there are total newbies out there. Someone is sure to edit >it with Microsloth Word, and then complain that DJGPP doesn't work. And >if the user uses something like RHIDE, they don't even need to know how >to write/edit a text file. I submit that someone so ignorant is best prevented from inflicting upon the world any prorams which by luck alone are compiled. >> >> A pretty stupid way to pack up the archive, if you ask me. It should be >> >> short names, period, with scripts to rename files and patch sources to use >> >> long names. >> > >> >I don't think it should be like that. If you just use DOS an >> >LFN-packed archive is OK. If you just use WIN95 an LFN-archive is even >> >better. If you use both DOS and Win95 you should follow the FAQ. If >> >you use OS2 you just have to know to unpack with PKUNZIP. IMHO it's >> >always best to stick to the original as close as possible (what about >> >a package that #includes streambuf.h directly, on a win95 system?) >> >> You seem to be missing the point. The script would rename the files and >> correct the filenames in all #include's from the header files. > >That is *not* a good solution. Unless you're advocating total removal >of LFN support (IMHO a worse thing), any name with extra characters >would cease to work, even though it would work fine on an 8+3 platform. Just what name would that be? A single example will suffice. >So, as the previous poster pointed out, #include in a user >program would die horribly under Windows. People would have to use your >script to change it to #include , and then their source >wouldn't work when they try to compile it on a Unix box. No, you're still missing the point entirely. >> Relying on the behavior of a dearchiver program is the Wrong Thing to do. > >I agree that it's unfortunate, but I cannot see any better way. Even though I've pointed it out. -- - Mike Remove 'spambegone' to send e-mail.