X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Authenticated: #27081556
From: Juan Manuel Guerrero <juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de>
To: rugxulo AT gmail DOT com
Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: DJGPP port of GNU gzip-1.3.9 uploaded
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 03:53:40 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2
Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200702050353.40792.juan.guerrero@gmx.de>
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0

rugxulo AT gmail DOT com wrote:

> On Jan 28, 5:20 pm, Juan Manuel Guerrero <juan DOT guerr DOT  DOT  DOT  AT gmx DOT de> wrote:
>> This is a port of GNU Gzip 1.3.9 to MSDOS/DJGPP.
[snip]

> Sorry if this is a dumb question, but why didn't you symlink the .EXEs
> in this? There are three .EXEs, each of size 184,096 bytes with
> identical CRCs, filedates, filetimes, etc. (I suspect you have a good
> reason, but the older GZIP135B.ZIP uses symlinks instead, as does your
> recent ed 0.4 port.)

The reason is quite simple, the Makefile.in does not create symlinks and my
intention was to keep the changes as small as possible. Netherless, this seems
to be a point of interest of the users so I will modify the config.sed script to
generate symlinks during the installation process the next time. The reason
that the ed 0.4 port uses symlinks is that I ediedt the Makefile.in manually
and I had not to write sed scripts to change the behaviour. The next port of
gzip will have symlinks instead of copies. Anyway if you need them, run the
command:
  ln -s gzip.exe gunzip.exe
and create them.

Regards,
Juan M. Guerrero