Hello Bob!

17 Oct 03 22:55, Bob Jones wrote to Mike Tripp:

 BJ> With Wes's decision to put a number of configuration files in
 BJ> /var/max/etc instead of /var/max (by default), there are already a
 BJ> number of items that don't work exactly like the DOS, OS/2 and Win32
 BJ> version.  Also, the current path "kludge" fix has left me
needing to
 BJ> use full path specifications in places where I should be relative to
 BJ> either /var/max or /var/max/etc, but I haven't gotten relative paths
 BJ> to work....  I've ignored the problem so far by having full paths
 BJ> specified in places that I normally wouldn't.....

Well there's still opportunity for improvement before things are done in
this regard.  Surely relative paths are no less valuable on Linux than
other platforms.

 BJ> (or get caught in debugging) on those platforms.  It does catch us on
 BJ> the Unix / Linux platforms, where file names are (normally) case
 BJ> sensitive....

Understood, though personally I've been content to live with DOS 8.3
conventions even where my file systems offers support for long filenames
and/or mixed case...simply because it is the lowest common denominator and
always works for all of my environments.  I certainly wouldn't want to deny
someone else the opportunity to create 128-char 12-layer paths in mixed
case if that's what they wanted, though. :)

.\\ike

--- GoldED 2.50+