X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:reply-to:subject:references:to:from:message-id
	:date:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=SUVAi8GH02Fj/a41
	4roBdSf3kkP5QFxMRLVy260QXp/wXiBbPUTsaRafgsxYH/fdmBQJyIErnkW5nDYj
	KLWYDvdtV8gLxLr76nvB6e47DRCPFot6+coqR+fxaZnv5fR9IlKGAeHvgDrXSCRn
	s8SkwA55qhWKmYDU0iYxUTSMwlY=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:reply-to:subject:references:to:from:message-id
	:date:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=1CwO8JM+0hOHxMhZYdV1st
	jpJnE=; b=rPJ1texERniSoqWGRgFPWlY72BogP4YedjIvi1HvPxp0h280o5wltW
	Ffki7a2Wldd8ZLB2i0Q8TYclwwSYNpqL4sTU5rAUBjt5/SkdiRF13GODzDchs+/V
	oYFdZk+76Wpi1E5Pi35J6QArfA0ePpOtLBrAVkL7pMaHqpe+z5kms=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*RU:sk:cpe-108, Hx-spam-relays-external:sk:cpe-108, H*r:sk:cpe-108
X-HELO:	csmail.cs.umass.edu
Reply-To:	moss AT cs DOT umass DOT edu
Subject:	Re: PATHEXT is fundamental to Windows and Should be recognised by CYGWIN
References:	<CACoZoo0doP455nnL3m0GYgXuUpLuB-p5Za9KeHfs6xmtT8it6A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <0D835E9B9CD07F40A48423F80D3B5A704BB88251 AT USA7109MB022 DOT na DOT xerox DOT net>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From:	Eliot Moss <moss AT cs DOT umass DOT edu>
Message-ID:	<69d7043c-6de9-e3f3-ebc8-e6342c02dd1d@cs.umass.edu>
Date:	Fri, 5 Aug 2016 21:59:44 -0400
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<0D835E9B9CD07F40A48423F80D3B5A704BB88251@USA7109MB022.na.xerox.net>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

On 8/5/2016 2:14 PM, Nellis, Kenneth wrote:
> From: Erik Soderquist
>> ... DOS did a lot of things
>> against already established conventions, such as using a backslash
>> instead of a forward slash as the directory separator, just "to be
>> different".
>
> Not just to be different, but to distinguish from slashes used as
> command qualifiers (a la VMS), don't you think?

Maybe ... but my first thought is that they did it to avoid
copyright lawsuits ...

Eliot Moss

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -