-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Josh Williams wrote: > On 11/4/07, Micah Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Christian Roche has submitted a revised version of a patch to modify the >> unique-name-finding algorithm to generate names in the pattern >> "foo-n.html" rather than "foo.html.n". The patch looks good, and will >> likely go in very soon. > > That's something I had meant to submit a bug report for a while back, > but somehow never found the time to do it. I guess it wasn't my top > priority since GNU/Linux is usually smart enough to ignore the file > extensions anyways.
I have not found that to be generally true; and particularly in the case of HTML files, which is most relevant here. >> A couple of minor detail questions: what do you guys think about using >> "foo.n.html" instead of "foo-n.html"? And (this one to Gisle), how would >> this naming convention affect DOS (and, BTW, how does the current one >> hold up on DOS)? > > Well, this problem is mainly for win32 users, so I think we need to > keep sloppy coding in mind. It's been my experience that *man* win32 > programs will treat everything after the first period as the file > extension. > > Honestly, I don't see any reason to risk the annoyance of these kinds > of bugs. Just go with the dash. Yeah, and that was probably the reason for it. > (On a side note, have you thought of running FreeDOS in a virtual machine?) I have, but haven't gotten around to it, and probably won't for a while. - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer... http://micah.cowan.name/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHLizQ7M8hyUobTrERCACFAJ4oJ/y+EGLiRyCj+qLaxbAEFWkSSwCfc5pQ dS3sv26PHop1Hfz73FcpFRg= =lVrq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
