Re: [ot] Re: doubt regarding .tgz
From: Seth H Holmes (sholmes_at_dweezil.NOSPAMFORMEroute-fu.net)
Date: 10 Jul 2003 17:34:08 GMT
In article <email@example.com>, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Wayne Throop wrote:
>>: Since Linux file names don't have such things as "extensions" to
>>: distinguish their contents (unlike MSWindows), there's a small but
>> You seem to be under the impression that windows extensions
>> somehow enforce content types in some way better than linux naming
>> conventions do. That turns out not to be the case.
> Well, yes and no. If you take the default MS Windows user settings, file
> extensions are hidden, and applications add them. It takes a willful act
> (or a clueless user with non-default settings) to make the extension not
> match the file's content.
> Did this discussion have anything to do with Linux networking? :)
It's amusing to see how wrong you are. File extensions simply
exist. Macintosh was the first to associate file types with
applications. Windows took it on next by building in
associations. Associations which can change or be changed. It is
simply on act of clever programming and convincing people of the
"right way" to do things. Long before Windows my text file were
.txt or .doc. I still use the extensions to make my life easy.
Linux has the "file" utility which can tell you what kind of file
something is. Sounds like it's a lot more handy than arbitrary
And yes, this has nothing to do with Linux networking, but it's
part of a thread that wound up here.
-- Seth H Holmes