Re: updates?

[Dwight Hubbard <dlhubbar collins rockwell com>]

Paul Hepworth wrote:

> >       Yeah IMHO Ea is not that great of an idea because when you copy
> > files in the shell they get tend to get messed up in the GUI.  It's also a
> > major hassle having lots of hidden directories.  It makes duplicating and
> > managing directories in the shell more annoying.  I would say just do
> > things by file extension for right now or failing that magic numbers.  EAs
> > are one feature too many for right now.
> >
> EAs are only a good idea if the VFS is used from the shell as well.  (So
> that typing mv/cp does copy/move the EAs as well.)  If the VFS is to be a MC
> and Gnome app only thing, then it isn't worth it.  But can't bash, csh,
> whatnot access the VFS as if it were a natural file system?  If not, then
> the whole idea of a VFS is less useful.
>

 Personally, if we are going to have EAs I would rather have something more
like the Amiga had, I.E the information was kept in a file with the same name
and a .info extension.  I.E. a file named "foo" would have it's EA information
in a file named "foo.info" At least that way things like
cp foo* /mnt/floppy
would copy the EA information as well.  I imagine making them hidden in the
shell will be more trouble than it's worth unless we plan on re-writing all the
various shells.  At least if you can see the info files, it's easy to handle
from the shell and doesn't take to long to get used to.

--
Dwight Hubbard (319) 295-1509         Rockwell-Collins
System Administrator
dlhubbar@collins.rockwell.com         Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52498