From: <ra...@ra...> - 2001-02-18 20:52:14
|
On 17 Feb, Chris boris Ross scribbled: -> On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 12:56:10PM -0800, ra...@ra... muttered... -> : -> I understand Raster if you tell me to sod off with the idea but I just -> : -> thought I would mention it now since we're chatting about meta data. If -> : -> you don't want to do it yourself then I'll try and write a patch for it -> : -> later on when e17's meta data is up, running, and working. :) -> : -> : rememebr i AM inventing apolicy here - yes - some peole wont like it - -> : many juts wont care - and i know i have a pile of good reasons for it - -> : i just havent figured out the detailsof storing the mta data in the -> : ".icons" dir (or whatever you want to call it) but i am pretty certain -> : it should in in a "dot" directory in the directory where the file sare -> : - exactly like .xvpics that xv did and now gimp uses. -> -> it's definatly got to be a hidden dir :) now i wish we could do REAL hidden dirs in linux (like just type: chmod +h directoryname - or the systemcall to do it) and then no one would know or be the wiser... then again this woudl mean we lose the ability of backwards compatability of having meta data follow tarball archives, filing system changes, removable media (cd's) etc.... mayeb - just maybe... we need to provide a "patched" ls for the system that never displays these directory names (unless you force it wiht some option... - like ls --show-those-damn-mtea-data-directoies ) :) -- --------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ra...@ra... ra...@va... ra...@en... ra...@li... ra...@zi... |