 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmail isthebestcom> wrote:
> FYI, GMail doesn't let you send exes, and checks the *contents* of zip
> files for exes.
yeah, that's right. Learned it the bad way, when I tried to send the file to
some friends so that they sent it back renamed... :/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/01/26 10:31:
> Alain <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>> Have you tried some other, less known, compression formats: BH, SIT, RAR, 7Z, A,
>> ACE, ARC, TZ, GZ, GZA, LHA, TAR,...
>
> You know, the sad part is that I'm on a Linux box. Could've just typed tar czf
> foo.tgz and be done with it. But I wanted to do it the dumb graphical way. So
> I just relied on the defaults. That means "File-Roller" took the executable
> name and just added zip. The exe continued.
>
> Another option would be to rename the file to be uploaded, eliminating the exe
> sufix. Not possible on Windows, but I've done it several times in the past on
> Linux. Like when sending tgzed mp3 to gmail. :)
>
>
Very easy to change or remove the extention on windows. You just neet to set
explorer to not hide known extentions. Always the first thing I do on a new install.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
I was making love to this girl and she started crying. I said, "Are you
going to hate yourself in the morning?" She said, "No, I hate Myself now."
Rodney Dangerfield
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alain <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> Very easy to change or remove the extention on windows. You just neet to set
> explorer to not hide known extentions. Always the first thing I do on a new install.
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...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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?
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"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.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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.
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"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.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/01/26 13:21:
> "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.
>
>
Explorer's default to always hiding the extentions that are registered.
To change:
Open an explorer window.
In the menu, chose "Tools"
Chose "Folders options"
Select the "Display" tab
Scroll down to "Hide extentions of known files types"
Uncheck the associated box.
Click "OK"
A few lines lower, you can supress the anoying "shortcut to..." from been added
to the name of new shortcuts.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
You know you've been raytracing too long when you resign the fact that printing
uses CMYK instead of RGB to one of those tests God gave to Job; otherwise life
would be too painful to go on.
-- Taps a.k.a. Tapio Vocadlo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> http://www.nocrew.org/software/httptunnel.html
>
> I've used this myself when I absolutely needed the ability to use NNTP
> and the port was blocked.
Umm... no thanks. I'd rather not lose my job if they find out I've
installed custom software to bypass their security :)
--
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
