Re: Cocoa stripping resource forks: does Jaguar fix?
Re: Cocoa stripping resource forks: does Jaguar fix?
- Subject: Re: Cocoa stripping resource forks: does Jaguar fix?
- From: Dan Crevier <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 09:47:35 -0700
On 7/4/2002 5:49 AM, "Ondra Cada" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
On Thursday, July 4, 2002, at 05:00 , Dan Crevier wrote:
>
>
>> Totally, since they are just folders and nothing else.
>
>
>
> Don't you have to set the bundle bit on the folder (SetFile -a B <folder>
>
> )
>
> if the extension isn't .app or .bundle?
>
>
Or any other known one (rtfd, eg.). Well, the very existence of the bundle
>
bit is another Mac OS X bug: the packages should be recognized by their
>
suffixes only, as it always was in NeXTStep -- for the very reson you
>
pointed out: it's portable.
Do you know if there's a list around? Is there a way to add one of my
extensions to this list?
>
Nevertheless, losing a bundle bit is an utterly unimportant trifle. Such a
>
bundle will work still without any problem; only it'd be shown as a folder
>
in Finder.
I disagree it's an unimportant trifle. It is data loss, and users will be
confused if their documents suddenly become folders.
Dan
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.