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