Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 13:33:21 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Tim Van Holder <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Status update (Smalltalk/Python)
In-Reply-To: <NEBBIOJNGMKPNOBKHCGHMENOCAAA.tim.van.holder@pandora.be>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010121133139.15729H-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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
Precedence: bulk


On Sun, 21 Jan 2001, Tim Van Holder wrote:

> As an aside, what's preferred in a DJGPP package: an extensionless
> script (gst-config), or one with a .sh extension (gst-config.sh)?

I think gst-config is preferred, since Bash will invoke it automatically.

> I did run into an old friend: missing pw_passwd and pw_gecos
> fields in struct passwd, and missing gr_passwd in struct group.
> Any particular objections to adding these (even though they have
> no real meaning on a DOS system, I suspect their presence might
> be required by POSIX)?

No, they aren't Posix, and a program which assumes them without testing 
is buggy.  But I think we've bumped into this enough times, so please go 
ahead and post the patches to add them.