Re: file coloring


On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, bulia byak wrote:

I have to agree with Andrew - "extension" is a foreign word on UNIX.  
( Some
users don't understand this word, as the above paragraph shows.

Sorry I could not understand how this relates to the proposed patch.

I meant this phrase:
  BTW, "File associations"  is more right name for "Extension File".

Extension is an concept from MS DOS.  Not that I want to change the manual
and the menu right now.

This is something I can understand even less. The proposed patch allows
to color file types by editing a config file, or through a dialog at
runtime. So the result would be the opposite - no more patches, never.
Everyone is able to define their own extensions and colors without
recompiling. What is wrong with this?

Check this thread:

Just because users are free to modify config files it doesn't mean they
won't request changes in the default config files.

Another example:

 And we only have 16 colors, some (most!) of which are already taken
(black - pipe, magenta - device, green - executable, red - core etc).

Oh my, it never occurred to me that 4 is "most!" of 16.

I didn't try to send a complete list.

Well, of course I'm not going to try to persuade the developers that
this is good, if they are so determined otherwise. I'm just sharing my
experience. If anyone is interested, please write to me and I will share
the patch.

Try to persuade Russell, who believes that you can already do this in
4.5.55.  Or work on the features that users actually request.

Pavel Roskin

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]