Neil Clopton wrote: > On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Andre Majorel <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > On 2010-05-14 11:47 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > File names are allowed to use any sign excepted the /, NUL, * > and ? in > > Linux file names. > > Unix forbids exactly two characters in file names : NUL and "/". > "*" and "?" are legal ; they just need to be quoted or escaped if > they appear on a shell command line. Just like white space, ";", > "(", ")", "|", "<", ">", "&", and a few others. > > > Thankfully the UNIX tradition includes properly documenting such > things and sticking with good standards. In other realms the rules > sometimes change with little or no notice. > > I'm a system administrator and I encourage my users to use only > letters, numbers, single spaces, ., - and _ in filenames. It prevents > a lot of problems when copying data between OS's or file systems and > when making backups. Even if there is no problem with the OS there > may be one with an application, a file sharing protocol or the file > system. > > Neil
I guess compatibility would stop for Windows, when people for example do use to much dots in the file name. Anyway, I tend to avoid even the regular space and I also tend to add unneeded information, e.g. '.txt' and by the way, some apps are pedantic, e.g. they wont extract a '.gz' or '.bz' if you just made a typo 'g' vs 'b', but the app still is able to detect the kind of archive. I don't like apps that allow users to e.g. name tracks using any sign, but then they try to save a track or part of a track using it's 'bad' name to include to the file name. IMO even a single space is uncomfortable and a _ is much better instead of using a space and I guess also the ~ is a valid sign for Linux, instead of .BAK. Thanks, Ralf _______________________________________________ 64studio-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users
