Cameron Kaiser [2001-11-19 13.30 -0800]:
> > The fact is that Netatalk could be doing a more right thing than it
> > is, by truncating the names or at least by logging a message on the
> > server when a client tries to list a directory which contains file
> > names they won't be able to get.
>
>I would strongly prefer it didn't willy-nilly truncate. What if you had
>filenames like
>
>Document Discussing Some Inane Topic Of More than 32 Characters Part 1 of 114
>Document Discussing Some Inane Topic Of More than 32 Characters Part 2 of 114
>Document Discussing Some Inane Topic Of More than 32 Characters Part 3 of 114
>:
>:
>etc.
>
>You couldn't come up with a general rule for truncation in that regard
>unless you resort to filth like MICROS~1's long file name kludge.

What about the afaik Mac-typical shortening amidst the file name?. Thus,
you'd get from the above something like that:

Document Discus...rs Part 1 of 114
Document Discus...rs Part 2 of 114
Document Discus...rs Part 3 of 114

>But I like the logging idea and I agree that ...

Yes.  Also, Netatalk could put the long filenames into the files' finder
comments, as some Mac ftp clients do it with URLs of downloaded files.

> > Failing silently is clearly wrong.
>
>Yes :-)

AOL!!!!!!!!!!1  ;-)


-Moss-
-- 
-eof-