Am Monday 13 March 2006 16:24 schrieb houghi:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 11:39:07AM +0100, Marcus Meissner wrote:
See my email address? Am I Novell enough for you?
What? No mail from Jack L. Messman? Is he not at least lurking here?
<snip>
I can understand your concerns regarding bloatetness (if any) and new default running daemon, but I do not understand your concerns regarding a simple name string like ".exe".
We here know that a program can have any name, like `program.exe` or `program.sh` or just `program`.
Naming it `program.exe` is a bit confusing for the user, to say the least. I will try explain how I think about it without any emotional thoughts behind it.
There is no technical reason to give it another name when it already is called `program.exe`. The program can be executed. However people who will see the program will automatically think that this program is made to run under a dos-based system and will either try it out or test it first.
Imagine that you would call it `program.txt`. That woould have the same technical limits, yet it would also be confusing as to what the file is capable of doing and not doing.
extentions in Linux are there mostly for the convinience of the user. If you take that convinience away, you have taken away the purpose of the extention under Linux.
In the past I have downloaded files that are named *.exe and deleted them just to realize that it was indeed the correct file with a non-standard name. So please if it is a program running under Linux, ditch the *.exe.
The same would also apply for python or bash scripts for example, which also run as python $somepath/program.py . No one complained here so far. .exe is only the logical consequence when you run apps which comes from a windows enviroment and there is .exe the right suffix. -- Adrian Schroeter SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany email: adrian@suse.de