From:	sos AT prospect DOT com DOT ru (Sergey Okhapkin)
Subject:	RE: Another coff.h question (fwd)
4 Feb 1998 01:06:39 -0800 :
Message-ID:	<01BD3155.1D3892F0.cygnus.cygwin32.developers@gater.krystalbank.msk.ru>
Reply-To:	cygwin32-developers AT cygnus DOT com
To:	"'cygwin32-developers AT cygnus DOT com'" <cygwin32-developers AT cygnus DOT com>

Geoffrey Noer wrote:
> Andy Piper wrote:
> >I think a.out.h is pretty standard.  Possibly we could get by with just
> >calling it a.out.h.
> 

> emacs' coff unexec includes one of coff.h, coff-encap/a.out.encap.h, a.out.h
> 

> If a.out.h is agreeable to everyone then call it a.out.h. Its certainly no
> less obvious what it is for than coff.h.
> 
> Can you let me know of your decision since I will have to change XEmacs.
> 

What about to put into the distribution coff.h and a.out.h as a wrapper to coff.h?

-- 
Sergey Okhapkin, http://www.lexa.ru/sos
Moscow, Russia
Looking for a job.

- Raw text -