Subject: RE: phantom file "aux" under bash b19
From: [email-masked] (Jason Zions)

13 Apr 1998 18:04:36 -0700
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
To: "'Edward Avis'" <[email-masked]>,
        "[email-masked]'"
	 <[email-masked]>

> IMHO it would be a good idea to map filenames like "con" and "aux" to
> _con and _aux.  Not a very pretty solution, but at least it would let
> things like aux.sh in Perl work properly.

The drawback to character-stuffing on filenames is that the names would look
different between ls and explorer. The fact that names are the same in both
environments is a strong plus; breaking it is a big minus.

This is one of the sticky points for case-sensitive pathnames; while
Explorer shows case correctly, it can get awfully confused if asked to
perform some operation on one of a pair of files whose names are the same if
case is ignored (e.g. FOO and Foo). Explorer usually operates on the "wrong"
file.

> I thought Win32 _was_ the NT API.  Does this mean the POSIX subsystem
> won't run on 95?

As others have said, you're incorrect about your assumption regarding the
native NT API; there are dozens of published references that mention the
distinction between the native NT API and Win32. (Start with Custer's Inside
Windows NT.) As for subsystems under Win95, that wretched excuse for an OS
doesn't have the concept. Win32 is the Windows95 native API.

-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".