Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/01/08/09:53:35
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 08:37:03AM -0500, Soren Andersen wrote:
>On 7 Jan 2001, an entity purporting to be Christopher Faylor
>[Christopher Faylor <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>] wrote [regarding Re: dev/null]
>
>soren:
>>> But manually, I just use 'nul'.
>
>Chris:
>> /dev/null in cygwin eventually translates to the Windows NUL device.
>
>I figured.
>
>> There is no reason to use 'NUL' rather than '/dev/null' since they are
>> both the same thing ... unless you enjoy using MS-DOS constructs rather than
>> UNIX ones. That's sort of anti-Cygwin, though.
>
>NO! NO! I am not anti-Cygwin ;-). I LUV Cygwin.
>
>As a background general-knowledge sort of thing, I think its good to know
>this. Allegory ... if you were stranded on a desert island with no way to buy
>tiolet paper, would it be good to know how to make plant leaves very soft ..
>? Someone might someday be working out a problem without Cygwin
>around. I don't WISH it on them, but it could happen.
Hopefully these people are reading the appropriate mailing lists and
newsgroups for non-cygwin problems, then.
In general, I think it is a good idea to use cygwin constructs as much
as possible. Then, if/when we modify cygwin so that it can work around
the brain-dead, nul, com, aux, prn stupidity foisted on us by Windows'
MS-DOS roots, people won't be scratching their heads thinking "But I
read that 'NUL' should work fine in the cygwin mailing list."
cgf
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -