Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com From: Chris Faylor Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:46:52 -0400 To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Subject: Re: hybrid text/binary mount Message-ID: <20000426154652.A25567@cygnus.com> Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cgf AT cygnus DOT com, cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com References: <20000426152724 DOT D25220 AT cygnus DOT com> <200004261944 DOT OAA13998 AT hp2 DOT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.12i In-Reply-To: <200004261944.OAA13998@hp2.xraylith.wisc.edu>; from khan@NanoTech.Wisc.EDU on Wed, Apr 26, 2000 at 02:44:47PM -0500 On Wed, Apr 26, 2000 at 02:44:47PM -0500, Mumit Khan wrote: >Chris Faylor writes: >>So, we'll be no worse off with raw PBM files than we are right now. >>This is obviously not 100% foolproof. That may be a reason not to even >>consider it because it will make problems a lot harder to track down. > >That was the caveat I was pointing out as well -- better the devil you >... At least we can now control the behaviour in two predictable ways >-- mount and explicit binary/text mode I/O. > >Jeffrey Juliano brought up the issue of Emacs' handling of text vs >binary. I think it's apples and oranges since text editors misreading >text vs binary is immediately evident to the user, but not so to a say >a program that converts one format to the other in a batch mode. Good point. I don't know if it helps but I keep meaning to point out that it is possible to actually mount *files* in binmode, too: mount -b c:\blah\foo.zip /blah/foo.zip cgf