Date:	Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:46:42 +0200 (MET DST)
From:	Mark Habersack <grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
Reply-To:	grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
cc:	"Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" <salvador AT inti DOT edu DOT ar>,
	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: .INF files questions
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.961017085215.24334F-100000@is>
Message-ID:	<Pine.NEB.3.95.961017104438.16494F-100000@ananke.amu.edu.pl>
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>
>On Wed, 16 Oct 1996, Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET) wrote:
>
>>   So if better if all the files are UNIX. That's the same for info.exe and
>> the files are little smaller in this way, so I don't see any reason to
>> distribute some files in DOS format.
>
>Please don't do that.  Info.exe can read both DOS- and Unix-style files,
>both compressed and uncompressed, so why shouldn't your Info reader do the
>same?  It is so simple!  Previous versions of info.exe indeed required
To cope with that you could read .inf files in binary mode (if they are not 
compressed) and then convert dos2unix with a call to crlf2lf() on the buffer.
The same would be if uncompressed the files, just convert the buffer in
memory to unix format.


/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Stand straight, look me in the eye and say goodbye
Stand straight, we drifted past the point of reasons why,
Yesterday starts tommorow, tommorow starts today,
The problems always seem to be
  we're picking up the pieces on the ricochet
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ http://ananke.amu.edu.pl/~grendel \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

- Raw text -