Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcs!wagner From: wagner@utcs.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: workbench Message-ID: <1986Dec24.191136.2866@utcs.uucp> Date: Wed, 24-Dec-86 19:11:36 EST Article-I.D.: utcs.1986Dec24.191136.2866 Posted: Wed Dec 24 19:11:36 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 24-Dec-86 19:37:04 EST References: <1111@spice.cs.cmu.edu> <1394@umd5> <5394@ukma.ms.uky.csnet> Reply-To: wagner@utcs.UUCP (Michael Wagner) Organization: University of Toronto Computing Services, general purpose UNIX Lines: 18 Checksum: 58987 In article <5394@ukma.ms.uky.csnet> sean@ukma.ms.uky.csnet (Sean Casey) writes: >In article <1394@umd5> louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) writes: >>I want to agree that having a file per directory to store the icon information >>rather than a .info file for each file is a big win. > >Why not just store the icon information in the original file? Having two >files is awfully messy. > >Sean Ah, but putting it in the same file is also messy. I think, in general, one wants the icon (and other) information in the .info file to persist even when an executable is replaced by the compiler, or a table is changed by an editor. Stupid programs should be allowed to ignore .info files and not break things. That's what's wrong with FILENOTE...no programs preserve it, because none know it's there. Michael