Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:29:00 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: To all of developers: please use .txt not .doc extension
Message-ID: <20001127232900.C32739@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20001127022113 DOT 2016 DOT qmail AT web121 DOT yahoomail DOT com> <20001126212851 DOT A7391 AT redhat DOT com> <eia62tg2pj16nd4gnfas2ffmvai1tspkss AT 4ax DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <eia62tg2pj16nd4gnfas2ffmvai1tspkss@4ax.com>; from rbh00@netcom.com on Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:50:24PM -0800

On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:50:24PM -0800, Richard Hitt wrote:
>On Sun, 26 Nov 2000 21:28:51 -0500, you wrote:
>
>>On Sun, Nov 26, 2000 at 06:21:13PM -0800, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>>>--- Jari Aalto <jari DOT aalto AT poboxes DOT com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>     I'm thankfull for the great effort everybody is making
>>>>     to get cygwin better and better. I just wanted to make an 
>>>>     additional note, that, would all cygwin developers
>>>>     remember that the .doc file is associated to the Word and
>>>>     the prefered way to refer to text files is .txt
>>>> 
>>>
>>>The preferred method for reading text files in Cygwin is to use a pager such as
>>>less or using read-only mode in an editor such as vim.  IIRC, view is a
>>>read-only mode for vim.  Extention of .doc indicates to me that it is
>>>documentation.
>>
>>I imagine that most of the doc files come straight from their respective
>>packages, too.  .doc files mean something different on UNIX than they
>>do on Windows.
>
>>From http://www.silicon-alley.com/ext/d.html, which is by no means
>definitive:
>.doc (1) t [any] software documentation
>.doc (2) t [any] version of .sty with added comments > LaTeX
>.doc (3) b [DOS, Win] > MS Word > document
>
>Also, I grepped a linux 2.4.0 tree and found 5 files for doc$ and 193
>files for txt$.  The total file-and-directory count for the tree was
>7955.
>
>My sympathies go with .txt denoting ASCII rather than the ambiguous and
>overused .doc denoting what?  framemaker?  Word?  Latex?
>
>The same URL above, under t.html, gives:
>.txt t [any] ASCII text. 

You can do statistical analysis or find any kind of "doc"umentation that
you want.  The fact of the matter is that if the creator of a package
(*not* the cygwin package maintainer) used doc we're not going to change
that.  I'm not going to rename files in source distributions where the
author used .doc as an extension.

If the person who put the package together for cygwin is using .doc
extensions, they should change to use .txt.

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com