.exe magic reloaded 2

[Larry Hall (Cygwin)]

On 9/15/2010 12:23 PM, Al wrote:
>>
>> For instance, this one:  Either we always remove the .exe suffix from
>> a file, or we have to check for each file with a .exe suffix, whether
>> it's executable or not.
>
> Probably without checking it. No sane program would use the .exe
> suffix as extension of a mere textfile.
>
> What would be the ideal approach, without thinking of backward issues?
>
> How about this?
>
> 1.) When a file is made executable .exe is appended, but only visible
> from Windows API.
> 2.) When the last execution bit is removed the .exe suffix is also removed.
> 3.) Using the .exe suffix from the Cygwin API always gives an error.
> 4.) Hence: You never see this suffix on the Cygwin API.

How would this work with non-Cygwin programs?  They wouldn't be handled under
(1).

-- 
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple