Clarence,
I know that Arachne manages to handle *some* 8+3 directory names just
fine. I was responding to a less than cognitive "solution" someone else
sent to the list.
The problem remains that Arachne can no longer handle *all* valid 8+3
subdirectories well enough to grab a message and give it to InSight to
read.
The purpose of this list, AFAIK, is to discuss "Arachne -- The Good, The
Bad, and The Ugly" so that the next version in the works has more good &
less bad. ['ugly' is a personal judgment call] When I report that I can
no longer access messages in my mail folders, I expect people to either
help, ask for more information, make suggestions and get feedback on
results. I do not expect people to tell me that I wouldn't have a
problem if I only would stop using "funny directory names." I most
certainly don't expect someone to say that "Michael might decide to fix
it in another version."
l.d.
====
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001 03:27:53 -0400, Clarence Verge wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2001 02:23:10 -0500, L.D. Best wrote:
>> The fact that you've run across such poorly written software that it
>> can't handle an 8+3 directory name does not excuse the fact that Arachne
>> *could* handle it before, but 1.70r3 *can't* handle it and SHOULD.
> Hi LD, all;
> Arachne 1.70r3 handles 8.3 directory names just fine - it even arrives
> with them included. <G>
> Check out the files in arachne\system\apm.db.
> My a170 finds them and accesses them without problem.
-- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
