On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 19:21:33 +0100, nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> "Fredrik Eriksson" <noo### [at] nowherecom> wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 18:07:13 +0100, nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom>  
>> wrote:
>> > "Fredrik Eriksson" <noo### [at] nowherecom> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:39:05 +0100, nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > really?!  It's possible to have a Windows file with actually no
>> >> > extension?  I don't mean hiding the extension from view, but
>> >> > actually having none...
>> >>
>> >> Of course it is. What made you think otherwise?
>> >
>> > old times?  I remember at some point Windows didn't let it be done.
>>
>> At what point was that? Even MS-DOS let you have extensionless files.
>
> perhaps it did, but not obviously.  Alain said he had to set up some
> configuration in order to do it.

That is a problem caused by the default options in Explorer. It was not an  
issue back in the days of MS-DOS and Windows 3.x, nor is it an issue if  
you use the command console in Windows XP/Vista.


-- 
FE

Post a reply to this message