Re: Windows-specific bug 11183

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 09:03:45 +0100
> From: Alessandro Vesely <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> 
> > OK... does this mean "yes, I think this patch is useful and should be
> > applied"?
> 
> Yes, it does. Or else we should also remove the other HAVE_DOS_PATHS
> in the same function so as to ban backslashes from %-patterns.

The other HAVE_DOS_PATHS fragment handles backslashes in _filenames_,
while this one handles backslashes in _patterns_.  So they are not
equivalent, and their omission for patterns is on purpose (Paul stated
the reasons).