From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id:	<10212121547.AA14052@clio.rice.edu>
Subject:	Re: DJGPP 2.04 status page updates: more to-dos, priorities
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:47:30 -0600 (CST)
In-Reply-To:	<200212120814.JAA24795@lws256.lu.erisoft.se> from "Martin Stromberg" at Dec 12, 2002 09:14:12 AM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> Eli said:
> > On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se wrote:
> > 
> > > Ehum. Didn't we adopt the format from cygwin or something?
> > 
> > We adopted it from a version of Cygwin that was used back then, but in 
> > the meantime Cygwin changed their format, so now we are not compatible.
> 
> Yes, but according to this post
> <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2001-02/msg01260.html> cygwin
> will understand the old format. It's possible that they changed that
> later of course.

Why don't we switch to the new format?  It says it's Win compatible
on windows systems (.lnk)

I don't know how they implemented it, but there are hacks available to
make sure .lnk would be a fixed size (510 bytes).

- Raw text -