Re: naming conventions for images

Subject: Re: naming conventions for images
From: "Dawson McKnight" <dawson_mcknight -at- hotmail -dot- com>
To: janice -dot- gelb -at- eng -dot- sun -dot- com, techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 10:49:26 EDT

Janice Gelb <janice -dot- gelb -at- eng -dot- sun -dot- com> writes:

Ok, I'm confused. I work in a UNIX environment and
don't have an 8.3 limitation. What UNIX are you
using that you're restricted?

But should we use 8.3 file names to accommodate flaky CD drives? That's why my company abides by 8.3. I'm told that it's a CD thing, not an OS thing.

I asked a developer in my company about the 8.3 controversy in the hope that he would clarify things, and here's what he said:

"It's not that unix or linux will have a problem with long file names, it's that writing long file names to a CD can be tricky. Most CDROM drives have gotten better about this and seem to handle the situation ok, but it's much safer to make sure that any file you write to a CD is 8.3. Better to be safe than sorry."

Actually, he means to say that *reading* long file names is tricky. Your CD burner can write them accurately, but you cannot guarantee that everyone's drives will read them accurately. If he's right, the 8.3 limitation is an arbitrary maximum not tied to Unix, but he also reports that he vaguely remembers that the 8.3 restriction is put forth in an ISO standard for CD contents.

This is a problem that, if true, brings us back to square one. Can anyone respond to it?


Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at

Previous by Author: LDAP "Object" Question
Next by Author: "Bug" reporting for documentation?
Previous by Thread: Re: naming conventions for images
Next by Thread: Re: naming conventions for images

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads